What's your theory about 9/11?

[carlitos]

I agree with the findings of the 9/11 Commission, and the additional information I have read like Lawrence Wright's excellent The Looming Tower. Al Qaeda planned, financed and conducted a terrorist attack on the United States on September 11, 2001, by simultaneously hijacking 4 aircraft and crashing them into 3 out of 4 of their targets. The 4th jet was crashed to the ground once the passengers figured out what was going on. The World Trade Center 1 & 2 suffered structural damage due to plane impact and fires and collapsed. WTC 7 suffered damage from being struck by WTC debris and fire and collapsed.

Here is a thread where those who believe alternative explanations can post their best theory. Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed.

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

[Brainache]

I hope you get somewhere with this thread, but given that the Truthers have not come up with anything you could call a coherent alternative narrative in the past 7 or 8 years, I don't like your chances.

Good Luck!

[Marquis de Carabas]

God did it.

[T.A.M.]

I believe that 19 Arab hijackers, as part of Al Qaeda, and working at the behest of OBL, carried out the 9/11 attacks. In preparation for their attacks they were possibly assisted by members of Saudi and Pakistani Intelligence. I believe that they were able to successfully carry out their attacks because of (A) A sense of invulnerability held by the USG and its agencies at the time, (B) Animosity between intelligence agencies, and (C) lack of preparation (ATC/NATO/NEADS/FAA) in dealing with four simultaneous hijackings, where the planes were used as missiles.

TAM:)
TAM:)

[Sam.I.Am]

I believe that the Bidelberg Group, in cahoots with Doctor Octopus bribed Hulk Hogan via the wrestling federation known as the nWo to get all medieval on those towers a**es.

Then they thought better about it and had cookies and milk instead and Hulk Hogan retired...

Then 19 Arab hijackers, as part of Al Qaeda, and working at the behest of OBL, carried out the 9/11 attacks. In preparation for their attacks they were possibly assisted by members of Saudi and Pakistani Intelligence. I believe that they were able to successfully carry out their attacks because of (A) A sense of invulnerability held by the USG and its agencies at the time, (B) Animosity between intelligence agencies, and (C) lack of preparation (ATC/NATO/NEADS/FAA) in dealing with four simultaneous hijackings, where the planes were used as missiles.

[Brainache]

God did it.


What's this? Destructionism?

[Drudgewire]

Rogue unicorns. I can't believe no one else sees it.

[Hokulele]

I believe that 9/11 was part of a conspiracy by Human Resources managers worldwide to develop an Internet-based tool that can be used to identify nutbars more easily during the hiring process. YouTube is the crown jewel of their development efforts. MySpace is a close second.

[Audible Click]

I believe that 9/11 was part of a conspiracy by Human Resources managers worldwide to develop an Internet-based tool that can be used to identify nutbars more easily during the hiring process. YouTube is the crown jewel of their development efforts. MySpace is a close second.

Nominated.

[Justin39640]

i believe that 9/11 was part of a conspiracy by human resources managers worldwide to develop an internet-based tool that can be used to identify nutbars more easily during the hiring process. Youtube is the crown jewel of their development efforts. Myspace is a close second.

winner!

[carlitos]

All entertaining posts so far. I sure hope that the resident skeptics will post their own theories.

[Hokulele]

In the time I have spent here, I have only seen two CTists attempt to put together a coherent theory: A-Train and Sizzler. All of the rest make it quite clear that they do not have any theories (RedIbis in particular), but are only here to attempt to poke holes in what they call the "Official Theory".

Sad, really.

[Horatius]

All entertaining posts so far. I sure hope that the resident skeptics will post their own theories.



They mostly just did.


Perhaps you meant to say, "resident deniers".

[Shalamar]

The Death Star. Only the beam was seriously underpowered, and we were unable to blow up the planet.

[Sam.I.Am]

The Death Star. Only the beam was seriously underpowered, and we were unable to blow up the planet.

You get what you pay for. Next time hire better subcontractors.

[Justin39640]

The Death Star. Only the beam was seriously underpowered, and we were unable to blow up the planet.
lol that gave me a good chuckle

heres some more judy woods inspiration
R0P5e3Qt2lM

[Magenta]

In the time I have spent here, I have only seen two CTists attempt to put together a coherent theory: A-Train and Sizzler. All of the rest make it quite clear that they do not have any theories (RedIbis in particular), but are only here to attempt to poke holes in what they call the "Official Theory".

Sad, really.


I was going to say something similar. For instance, I haven't seen any attempt to explain how Silverstein benefited from destroying 7WTC; how and why the FDNY were complicit; how and when the evidence at Shanksville and the Pentagon could have been "planted", and so on, let alone any coherent overarching hypothesis. What I've mostly seen, apart from "pwnage", is an obsessive compulsive fixation on minutiae combined with equivocation and evasion when it comes to answering questions about their own claims (such as they are).

[carlitos]

It's just my own humble opinion, but having had this conversation elsewhere, focusing the discussion on making affirmative theories weeds out the unserious. I know that I'm a recent arrival, and probably being unrealistic, but I would love to coax the skeptics truthers to post here if at all possible.

[Brainache]

In the time I have spent here, I have only seen two CTists attempt to put together a coherent theory: A-Train and Sizzler. All of the rest make it quite clear that they do not have any theories (RedIbis in particular), but are only here to attempt to poke holes in what they call the "Official Theory".

Sad, really.

Have we forgotten Max Photon and Ace Baker so soon?

[Shalamar]

You get what you pay for. Next time hire better subcontractors.

*grumble* Stupid wookie slaves...

[JoeyDonuts]

Oliver Stone, feeling that his career was in a bit of the doldrums, arranged the entire thing so he could make a riveting dramatization of the event.

[Hokulele]

Have we forgotten Max Photon and Ace Baker so soon?


Max had more theories on more topics than I have had beers since I reached legal drinking age. AFAIK, he never had a single coherent theory.

Ace originally only cared about dustification, and when Judy jilted him, he moved on to his CGI nonsense. Again, he never had a theory meant to incorporate all of the evidence from that day.

[SezMe]

Max had more theories on more topics than I have had beers since I reached legal drinking age.
Like a good skeptic, limiting your claims as much as possible, eh? :)





No, I'm not Canadian.

[Humanzee]

Youtube viral marketing.

[MIKILLINI]

Have we forgotten Max Photon and Ace Baker so soon?

In regards to Max, I almost mentioned his name to Homeland Insurgency. Even though HI may have read some of Max's theory, I held back in mentioning
that because it would've just given HI more stupid to argue with.

[Foolmewunz]

I'm of two minds on this.

Living in Hong Kong and under the English system, I think that 9/11 generally follows 8/11 and is, in turn followed by 10/11.

But my American side is at odds with my recent lifestyle. Considering my roots and upbringing, I often think that 9/11 is actually preceded by 9/10 and followed by 9/12.

Math(s) not being my long suit, I don't know if I'll ever settle this conundrum.

[~enigma~]

I agree with the findings of the 9/11 Commission, and the additional information I have read like Lawrence Wright's excellent The Looming Tower. Al Qaeda planned, financed and conducted a terrorist attack on the United States on September 11, 2001, by simultaneously hijacking 4 aircraft and crashing them into 3 out of 4 of their targets. The 4th jet was crashed to the ground once the passengers figured out what was going on. The World Trade Center 1 & 2 suffered structural damage due to plane impact and fires and collapsed. WTC 7 suffered damage from being struck by WTC debris and fire and collapsed.

Here is a thread where those who believe alternative explanations can post their best theory. Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed.

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.
With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound he pulls WTC 7 down.
Go go Godzilla :)

[jhunter1163]

Seven and a half hours into this thread, 28 posts, and the number of Truther responses remains zero.

[Hokulele]

With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound he pulls WTC 7 down.
Go go Godzilla :)


:D

[Eyeron]

There was a malfunction in the inverted tachnotronic disbursement ray when the time travelers left for their own time.

[Sam.I.Am]

*grumble* Stupid wookie slaves...

Wookie says WaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAWAAAWaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaA aAaAOWWaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaAaA!!

WA!

[lee5]

I was hoping to finally see a complete theory from a truther.

I am very disappointed.

It is almost like truthers do not even click threads like these.

[T.A.M.]

Seven and a half hours into this thread, 28 posts, and the number of Truther responses remains zero.

with HI banned, who's left? runlikell, bill smith, deep44, JJ, RedIbis.

Thats it.

TAM:)

[RedIbis]

All of the rest make it quite clear that they do not have any theories (RedIbis in particular), but are only here to attempt to poke holes in what they call the "Official Theory".



And what exactly is wrong with that?

[Comrade Raptor]

It was obviously Magneto.

1. Who else has the power to bring down steel buildings without a trace of explosives?

2. He blatantly hates humanity.

3. He's evil.

4. It wouldn't be the first time he pulled something like this.

5. He's openly bent on world domination.

6. He's jewish!


Case closed. Magneto did it. All the evidence fits, man.

[peteweaver]

It was the Chilean Military Junta backed by the CIA.

[TruthersLie]

one word.

Mothra

[carlitos]

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

And what exactly is wrong with that?
LOL

[Foolmewunz]

And what exactly is wrong with that?

Not a thing, Red. As long as you don't mind that we poke holes in your holes. Pretty soon there's nothing but whole holes, though, and no concrete theories. And since the thread title seems to be about actual theories, the fact that now we know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall doesn't really address his question.

So the short answer would've been,

RedIbis: No.

[Stellafane]

And what exactly is wrong with that?


Hi RedIbis. I give you some points for at least posting in this thread, something other Truthers have thus far avoided.

As to your question above, the thing that's wrong with simply trying to poke holes in the "OCT" without offering any cogent alternative theory is that it's ultimately impotent. You see, I believe the OCT not because I'm a Bush loyalist (voted against him twice, more if they'd have let me) or think America can do no wrong. I believe it because by far, it's the theory that best fits all the available evidence. I've yet to see an alternative theory that can even stand on its own weight without collapsing into a mess of self-contradictions, never mind be able to explain the evidence. Thus right now, the OCT is the only theory that makes any sense. And I see nothing currently on the horizon that has even a remote chance to compete with it.

Now of course, as with any theory there's going to be some minor odds and ends that taken at face value may look a little odd or anomalous. Here's an example. Let's say you accept the theory that the moon is much closer to Earth than the stars, since it makes so much sense and the evidence for it is so strong. Yet I know of people who insist that they have seen stars within the dark portion of a sliver moon. Such a sight should be impossible under the current moon theory. Should we then toss it out, along with everything that we know, to accommodate the evidence presented by these eyewitnesses? Do we invent some bizarre and convoluted theory to incorporate this evidence? Or do we simply accept that these reports are flawed or misinterpreted -- perhaps the witesses misremembered, or mistook a slow moving satellite for a star.

It seems to me that the 9/11 CT movement consists entirely of equally specious bits and pieces, minor misconceptions and errors that add up to nothing. That these little anomalous bits exist speaks not at all to the viability of the OCT. However, the fact that however you choose to connect the dots, no other theory can even be articulated with a straight face, speaks volumes. Because until CTers have such a theory, one that can be examined and stands up to scrutiny better than the OCT does, then what Truthers are doing amounts to little more than barking at the moon.

[RedIbis]

Hi RedIbis. I give you some points for at least posting in this thread, something other Truthers have thus far avoided.

As to your question above, the thing that's wrong with simply trying to poke holes in the "OCT" without offering any cogent alternative theory is that it's ultimately impotent. You see, I believe the OCT not because I'm a Bush loyalist (voted against him twice, more if they'd have let me) or think America can do no wrong. I believe it because by far, it's the theory that best fits all the available evidence. I've yet to see an alternative theory that can even stand on its own weight without collapsing into a mess of self-contradictions, never mind be able to explain the evidence. Thus right now, the OCT is the only theory that makes any sense. And I see nothing currently on the horizon that has even a remote chance to compete with it.

Now of course, as with any theory there's going to be some minor odds and ends that taken at face value may look a little odd or anomalous. Here's an example. Let's say you accept the theory that the moon is much closer to Earth than the stars, since it makes so much sense and the evidence for it is so strong. Yet I know of people who insist that they have seen stars within the dark portion of a sliver moon. Such a sight should be impossible under the current moon theory. Should we then toss it out, along with everything that we know, to accommodate the evidence presented by these eyewitnesses? Do we invent some bizarre and convoluted theory to incorporate this evidence? Or do we simply accept that these reports are flawed or misinterpreted -- perhaps the witesses misremembered, or mistook a slow moving satellite for a star.

It seems to me that the 9/11 CT movement consists entirely of equally specious bits and pieces, minor misconceptions and errors that add up to nothing. That these little anomalous bits exist speaks not at all to the viability of the OCT. However, the fact that however you choose to connect the dots, no other theory can even be articulated with a straight face, speaks volumes. Because until CTers have such a theory, one that can be examined and stands up to scrutiny better than the OCT does, then what Truthers are doing amounts to little more than barking at the moon.

I appreciate your thorough and civil response. For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else, I would suggest that LIHOP is a theory which competes with the official story, and deserves equal investigative treatment.

[BigAl]

I appreciate your thorough and civil response. For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else, I would suggest that LIHOP is a theory which competes with the official story, and deserves equal investigative treatment.

What does "LIHOP" theory, whatever that is say about the literal tons of evidence and thousands of eyewitnesses that support the 4 jets causing all the death and destruction on 9/11 and the fat evidence trail that shows that 19 Islamist Arabs hijacked those planes?

[funk de fino]

I appreciate your thorough and civil response. For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else, I would suggest that LIHOP is a theory which competes with the official story, and deserves equal investigative treatment.

If by compete you mean you have evidence supporting LIHOP then maybe you have a point. You don't so it doesn't.

Not even close.

[defaultdotxbe]

With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound he pulls WTC 7 down.
Go go Godzilla :)
http://pics.xbehome.com/albums/userpics/10001/godzilla_vs_megalon.jpg

[Z]

The digging action of ants destabilized the foundations, and caused the buildings to sway into the paths of two innocent passing jetliners, thus resulting in a burst of hot fuel being poured into the ant tunnels; the ants, being thus aggrevated, quickly and sloppily evacuated, further weakening the foundations, causing total global collapse.

And they used thermate.

[twinstead]

I appreciate your thorough and civil response. For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else, I would suggest that LIHOP is a theory which competes with the official story, and deserves equal investigative treatment.

But red, you've never argued LIHOP. It's always been MIHOP. Are you changing your theory to LIHOP? If so, I suppose you'll be submitting the evidence that compelled you to start believing LIHOP pretty soon. A new thread would be AWESOME!

ETA: oh, wait. I see it now. The "For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else...". that means of course even though it isn't even close to the theory that fits the evidence the best, you are still generally believe MIHOP.

Carry on.

[RedIbis]

But red, you've never argued LIHOP. It's always been MIHOP. Are you changing your theory to LIHOP? If so, I suppose you'll be submitting the evidence that compelled you to start believing LIHOP pretty soon. A new thread would be AWESOME!

You really are a fundamentalist with no real interest in civil discourse.

[funk de fino]

You really are a fundamentalist with no real interest in civil discourse.

Yoo--hoo-hoo!
I wanna be like you-oo-oo
I wanna talk like you
Walk like you, too-oo-oo
You'll see it's true-oo-oo
Someone like me-ee-ee
Can learn to be
Like someone like me

[carlitos]

You really are a fundamentalist with no real interest in civil discourse.
I am being totally serious with this. Could you possibly post your theory here? Seriously? Not an acronym, but an actually theory about what happened, if it's different from the 'official story' in some meaningful way. Thanks!

[Stellafane]

I appreciate your thorough and civil response. For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else, I would suggest that LIHOP is a theory which competes with the official story, and deserves equal investigative treatment.

OK, good, this is a start. But if we're talking LIHOP, doesn't that mean that you accept that the actual events that occured on 9/11 -- planes hitting buildings and so on -- happened as described in the OCT? Thus there is no point in examining any of the physical evidence, since in both theories (OCT or LIHOP) it would be precisely the same? If so, I think we could immediately dispense with a great deal of the craziness and (frankly) stupidity which has plagued the 9/11 CT from the outset: CDs, Pentagon flyovers, nanothermite, space beam weapons, the lot.

The focus can then be on evidence that LIHOP actually happened. Is this a fair assessment in your opinion?

[Dave Rogers]

If so, I think we could immediately dispense with a great deal of the craziness and (frankly) stupidity which has plagued the 9/11 CT from the outset: CDs, Pentagon flyovers, nanothermite, space beam weapons, the lot.

We could also assume that nobody could have been involved who wasn't in a direct position to prevent the attacks, including, for example, Silverstein; we could therefore dismiss any discussion of his statements after the attacks as irrelevant. Would that also be reasonable? And if not, why not?

Dave

[RedIbis]

I am being totally serious with this. Could you possibly post your theory here? Seriously? Not an acronym, but an actually theory about what happened, if it's different from the 'official story' in some meaningful way. Thanks!

My comment wasn't directed at you. It's not my theory, but I think Stellafane has the right tack as far as just having a reasonable conversation about possible theories. In the interest of time, I'll probably stick to the most specific and sincere questions. Any attempt at getting me to summarize, arguably the most complex single day in American history and what I think "really happened" isn't going to elicit much of a response from me.

[Pardalis]

I appreciate your thorough and civil response. For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else, I would suggest that LIHOP is a theory which competes with the official story, and deserves equal investigative treatment.

Didn't you say once that you believed 95% in MIHOP?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=140242
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4618244#post4618244

[dtugg]

Any attempt at getting me to summarize, arguably the most complex single day in American history and what I think "really happened" isn't going to elicit much of a response from me.

Yes we know. You have no theory. Because producing a coherent inside jobby job theory that fits the evidence is impossible. You know very well that you would look like a fool (well, more than usual) if you even tried.

[~enigma~]

My comment wasn't directed at you. It's not my theory, but I think Stellafane has the right tack as far as just having a reasonable conversation about possible theories. In the interest of time, I'll probably stick to the most specific and sincere questions. Any attempt at getting me to summarize, arguably the most complex single day in American history and what I think "really happened" isn't going to elicit much of a response from me.
Surprise surprise. Red is playing hide my beliefs again which more than likely means he has none and is only posting to satisfy some weird neurological disorder.

[RedIbis]

OK, good, this is a start. But if we're talking LIHOP, doesn't that mean that you accept that the actual events that occured on 9/11 -- planes hitting buildings and so on -- happened as described in the OCT? Thus there is no point in examining any of the physical evidence, since in both theories (OCT or LIHOP) it would be precisely the same? If so, I think we could immediately dispense with a great deal of the craziness and (frankly) stupidity which has plagued the 9/11 CT from the outset: CDs, Pentagon flyovers, nanothermite, space beam weapons, the lot.

The focus can then be on evidence that LIHOP actually happened. Is this a fair assessment in your opinion?

I've never contested that real planes hit the towers. I think you're confusing the need for physical evidence to support collapse theories with proving that planes hit the buildings.

A productive discussion can ensue if various theories aren't simply lumped together. In this thread I've only suggested that IMO, LIHOP is as plausible as the official story.

[Pardalis]

What about your 95% certainty in MIHOP?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4618244#post4618244

[RedIbis]

Didn't you say once that you believed 95% in MIHOP?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=140242
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4618244#post4618244

It looks like I had a lot to say:

So Red I am still confused.

If you were a betting man, and you were about to know the entire, real truth, about the events of 9/11, would you bet on,

(A)LIHOP
(B)MIHOP
(C)Criminal Negligence

or

(D)Incompetence

TAM

This is a fair question, and I know it will be nothing but chum for the bottom feeders, but I would answer (B) with about 95% certainty. There is always doubt, and I don't pretend to know the whole story about anything.

My point in this thread is that (A) is criminal, in fact (E) CYA is criminal, as well.

Agreed?

Bolded for Pardalis' edification.

[Pardalis]

"I would answer (B) with about 95% certainty"

Seems pretty straight forward to me. Was there a secret meaning I missed?

[Pardalis]

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a154/perdalis/732g1f7.gif

[Stellafane]

I've never contested that real planes hit the towers. I think you're confusing the need for physical evidence to support collapse theories with proving that planes hit the buildings.

I'm not sure "confusing" is the right word here. I'm just trying to establish what we don't have to worry about, and get down to the things that we should be focusing upon. Thus if the theory is LIHOP, we don't have to debate whether or not planes hit the towers -- indeed, we don't have to examine anything at all concerning the physical evidence, since it would be precisely the same as the OCT (unless the theory is some sort of "LIHOP with an assist," in which case the physical evidence comes back into play).

A productive discussion can ensue if various theories aren't simply lumped together. In this thread I've only suggested that IMO, LIHOP is as plausible as the official story.

I readily accept that LIHOP does not fly straight into the face of reality in that it doesn't violate any physical laws or demand evidence that thus far has been utterly lacking. However, I can't accept that it's "just as plausible" as the OCT, for the following reasons:


I have not seen any real evidence that suggests any specific advance knowledge of the attacks as they occured on 9/11, beyond the usual general indications that terrorists don't like us and would like to do something to us someday.
The "benefits" of such an attack to whomever did the "L"-ing in the LIHOP scenario seem nonexistant or nebulous at best.

Thus to me, I see no means, motive, or opportunity behind the LIHOP theory. So although it is indeed possible in a technical sense, I find no compelling reason to believe it.

[Pardalis]

OK, I haven't got all day, let's try another way.

Red, what percentage of certainty would you put on these theories:

-Controlled demolition of WTC towers:

Me 0%
You ?%

-Controlled demolition of 7 WTC:

Me 0%
You ?%

-No plane crashed in the Pentagon:

Me 0%
You ?%

-No plane crashed in the field in Shanksville:

Me 0%
You ?%

-The hijackers were not Islamic terrorists, but CIA:

Me 0%
You ?%

Let's start with these basic ones for starters. Maybe with this exercise we can help you come up with a general idea of what happened that day.

[Toke]

To me the most suspicius thing about 9/11 was the attempt to get Henry Kissinger to head the 9/11 commission. That suggest there is something to hide.
I find LIHOP very unlikely, but have no trouble believing in Bush and Cheney doing their best to hide criminal incompetence.

[R.Mackey]

Are you folks seriously playing "Let's Beg RedIbis for his Alleged Theory" again (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4071757#post4071757)?

He's had years to develop one. He hasn't and he won't.

Honestly, do you folks have nothing better to do? This is like tantalizing a cat by dangling a piece of string in front of its nose. The minute you all stop playing, the pathetic, theory-free remnants of the Truth Movement vanish utterly.

[kookbreaker]

one word.

Mothra

You blame Mothra for everything! :mad::mad::mad::mad:

[Pardalis]

It's kind of fascinating to see someone being so perfectly comfortable living in a country (IIRC Red is an American) with the notion that its government may or may not have killed 3000 of its own citizens. Entertaining such a thought for years on end, seeing two administration pass without ever thinking it through or doing anything about it.

It boggles my mind. If I had any doubts that my own country could be capable of something remotely like this (let alone 95% certainty), I would damn straight want to have the answers, and quick, and I would do something about it, not play with the idea for eight years and still have no coherent idea of what happened.

I imagine different types of personalities react differently. Red Ibis is the passive submissive type I guess.

[TruthersLie]

My comment wasn't directed at you. It's not my theory, but I think Stellafane has the right tack as far as just having a reasonable conversation about possible theories. In the interest of time, I'll probably stick to the most specific and sincere questions. Any attempt at getting me to summarize, arguably the most complex single day in American history and what I think "really happened" isn't going to elicit much of a response from me.

So you mean the LIHOP/MIHOP that you believe is so complex it can't be summed up in a paragraph?

I mean the common narrative is that 19 islamic fundamentalists lead by a wack job, use the policies in place on 9/11 to hijack 4 jets, which they then flew into 3 buildings.

[twinstead]

You really are a fundamentalist with no real interest in civil discourse.

I lost interest in civil discourse with truthers years ago. You think I'M the fundamentalist? Remember, I support the theory that is supported by the available evidence the BEST, by far. In my mind that's the ONLY position to have until better evidence is presented. It has been not.

Why exactly do you think that makes me a fundamentalist?

[Pardalis]

Red Ibis is an agnostic fundamentalist (well, in reality 95% truther, but don't tell anyone).

[Comrade Raptor]

I twice offered a group of troofers a real money cash prize if they could put together a MIHOP theory that at least sounded plausible and was internally consistent. Didn't even need to have real evidence, just sound plausible.

Not only did I not get any takers, I was met with a barrage of "disinfo agent" accusations.

This tells me that there's not one, not ONE troofer who will let go of ANY of their ridiculous ideas once adopted, even if some of them contradict others. They would sooner embrace the lot than to dismiss one.

I have had them throw out "no plane at the pentagon" and "remote controlled plane" at the pentagon in the same paragraph and categorically refuse to pick one or the other.

They just really, really hate being asked for a coherent story.

[Pardalis]

They just want America to be guilty. That's their theory.

[TruthersLie]

You blame Mothra for everything! :mad::mad::mad::mad:

Hey.
1. The nist report didn't even bother to see if there was proof mothra did it.
2. the 9/11 commission report doesn't even metnion mothra
3. the entry damage to the pentagon was not consistent with mothra
4. the crater in shanksville is not consistent with mothra either.

it is obvious that it was mothra.

[Audible Click]

The digging action of ants destabilized the foundations, and caused the buildings to sway into the paths of two innocent passing jetliners, thus resulting in a burst of hot fuel being poured into the ant tunnels; the ants, being thus aggrevated, quickly and sloppily evacuated, further weakening the foundations, causing total global collapse.

And they used thermate.

Or termites. The steel eating kind.

[Thunder]

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

Da Joos did it!!!

That's my theory.

;)

[FineWine]

My comment wasn't directed at you. It's not my theory, but I think Stellafane has the right tack as far as just having a reasonable conversation about possible theories. In the interest of time, I'll probably stick to the most specific and sincere questions. Any attempt at getting me to summarize, arguably the most complex single day in American history and what I think "really happened" isn't going to elicit much of a response from me.


But, in reality (how you hate that word!), there was nothing particularly complex about the events of 9/11. Nineteen Islamist terrorists hijacked four planes and flew three of them into buildings. There is overwhelming evidence supporting that assertion and nothing at all contradicting it.

[carlitos]

My comment wasn't directed at you. It's not my theory, but I think Stellafane has the right tack as far as just having a reasonable conversation about possible theories. In the interest of time, I'll probably stick to the most specific and sincere questions. Any attempt at getting me to summarize, arguably the most complex single day in American history and what I think "really happened" isn't going to elicit much of a response from me.
I put my theory in the OP. It's a very short paragraph. Seriously, you can't posit any type of theory in just a few paragraphs?

[Pardalis]

We've scared the little bird away, again. :(

[johnny karate]

OK, I haven't got all day, let's try another way.

Red, what percentage of certainty would you put on these theories:

You'll have to pardon me for butting in, but since I doubt RedIbis has the intellectual honesty to answer any of these truthfully, I think we can glean his opinions based on his post history.

Controlled demolition of WTC towers:

Me 0%
You ?%

I couldn't put a percentage on it, but RedIbis has definitely presented and/or defended scenarios that support a belief in the controlled demolition of the towers. Most notably in his implication of Turner Construction here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4640901&postcount=2555).

And when it was pointed out to him that Turner Construction in fact is not in the controlled demolition industry (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4641963&postcount=2590), he continued to defend his assertion that it was (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4647949#post4647949), until finally running away from the issue entirely.

I find it hard to believe someone would defend such a ludicrous position unless they were desparately struggling to wedge it into a pre-determined conclusion that the towers collapsed due to controlled demolition.

Controlled demolition of 7 WTC:

Me 0%
You ?%

RedIbis is 100% on this. Just read any of the numerous threads in which he rails against the WTC7 Report, coupled with his careful parsing of firefighter testimony (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3982013&postcount=13).

He doesn't buy for a second that it was a fire-driven collapse. So what else does that leave? I'll give RedIbis the benefit of the doubt and assume he doesn't believe in invisible space beams or mini-nukes.

No plane crashed in the Pentagon:

Me 0%
You ?%

I haven't seen enough from RedIbis on this topic. But I see no reason why he would suddenly become rational when it comes to the Pentagon crash.

No plane crashed in the field in Shanksville:

Me 0%
You ?%

I couldn't put a percentage on this either, but a while back, RedIbis sure seemed awfully concerned about the content of the soil at the Shanksville site, didn't he?

The hijackers were not Islamic terrorists, but CIA:

Me 0%
You ?%

As someone who has strong inclinations towards controlled demolition, and has at least confessed his belief in a MIHOP scenario, I would speculate the words he would take issue with here are "hijackers" and "terrorists", preferring to replace them with some version of the word "patsy".

Red, if I'm off-base on anything, feel free to step in and correct me.

[johnny karate]

But, in reality (how you hate that word!), there was nothing particularly complex about the events of 9/11. Nineteen Islamist terrorists hijacked four planes and flew three of them into buildings. There is overwhelming evidence supporting that assertion and nothing at all contradicting it.

This has been pointed out to RedIbis pretty much every time he makes that lame argument.

[timhau]

My theory is along the following lines: 9/11 is thin at one end, much MUCH thicker in the middle, and then thin again at the far end.

No, wait. That was the brontosaur. I always get those two mixed up.

[kookbreaker]

Hey.
1. The nist report didn't even bother to see if there was proof mothra did it.
2. the 9/11 commission report doesn't even metnion mothra
3. the entry damage to the pentagon was not consistent with mothra
4. the crater in shanksville is not consistent with mothra either.

it is obvious that it was mothra.

Mothra-hugger! :mad:

[Magenta]

So, three days into this thread and only one truther has responded?

I think by not stating anything specific and coherent about what they think happened, truthers can hang on to the possibility, however remote, that something is wrong at all three sites. It's consistent with their approach of cherry-picking bits of evidence that seem anomalous while ignoring the vast amount of evidence that is consistent with the accepted version of events. It's intellectually dishonest, but judging by their style of argumentation on this forum, they don't seem bothered by that.

No plane crashed in the field in Shanksville:

Me 0%
You ?%

I couldn't put a percentage on this either, but a while back, RedIbis sure seemed awfully concerned about the content of the soil at the Shanksville site, didn't he?


This is a previous comment from RedIbis:

I have no idea. My main concern is that the Shanksville ditch does not appear to contain a 100 ton commercial airliner.

[Pardalis]

He also never acknowledged the DNA evidence at the Pentagon and Shanksville.

[JoeyDonuts]

He also never acknowledged the DNA evidence at the Pentagon and Shanksville.

That in particular really grinds me.

AFIP's efforts in ID'ing the victims using the technology available at the time as quickly as they did was nothing short of heroic. Terrible, heartbreaking, soul-crushing, and saddening work - but heroic.

[ElMondoHummus]

That in particular really grinds me.

AFIP's efforts in ID'ing the victims using the technology available at the time as quickly as they did was nothing short of heroic. Terrible, heartbreaking, soul-crushing, and saddening work - but heroic.

This is true. Given the sheer number of identifications they had to make, plus the fact that a good part of their resources had to be allotted to the anthrax event (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=43524) that year, they did beyond yeoman's work. This is yet another thing that gets lost in the conspiracy peddlers attempts to rewrite the 9/11 narrative: The incredible work those pathologists did in the weeks following.

[Reactor drone]

I've always liked the holographic towers theory.

Finding it impossible to build the world trade centre towers as designed, the port authority instead set up early holographic projectors to give the impression that there were two skyscrapers there.Anyone who worked or visited them was subjected to an elaborate virtual reality experience.

Given the huge expense of maintaining this charade the plan was hatched to "destroy" the holographic buildings with holographic planes,thereby implicating Iraq somehow and allowing the NWO to invade with no opposition.

All the victims are now part of the NWO private army in their secret base made out of a hollowed out volcano.

:cool:

[JoeyDonuts]

All the victims are now part of the NWO private army in their secret base made out of a hollowed out volcano.

Hey, I've seen this movie.

You know, the one where they make Sean Connery out to be a Japanese person merely by slapping comically large eyebrows on him?

[Hokulele]

You know, the one where they make Sean Connery out to be a Japanese person merely by slapping comically large eyebrows on him?


As a person of partial Japanese descent, I personally found that to be extremely amusing.

[JoeyDonuts]

As a person of partial Japanese descent, I personally found that to be extremely amusing.

Yeah. Don't forget to sell it by stooping over, shuffling your feet when you walk, and apologize profusely for everything.

Screenwriter really phoned that one in.

[Hokulele]

Yeah. Don't forget to sell it by stooping over, shuffling your feet when you walk, and apologize profusely for everything.


Oh, solly. Belly solly.

[RedIbis]

Are you folks seriously playing "Let's Beg RedIbis for his Alleged Theory" again (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4071757#post4071757)?

He's had years to develop one. He hasn't and he won't.

Honestly, do you folks have nothing better to do? This is like tantalizing a cat by dangling a piece of string in front of its nose. The minute you all stop playing, the pathetic, theory-free remnants of the Truth Movement vanish utterly.

Post #41

[Dave Rogers]

Post #41

Which, of course, is not a response to the request to "Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed", but rather a suggestion as to a class of theories that might merit investigation.

Dave

[A W Smith]

My theory about 9/11?

We got caught with our pants down. AQ saw how inept our security systems were at airports where potential missiles were launched every minute daily (missiles being passenger aircraft). They saw that the doors to the cockpit were no stronger than your average Winnebago motor home bathroom door. They realized that they (AQ) already had hand to hand military combat training camps in place and willing martyrs just waiting for Akbar and his virgins. And that Most aircraft passengers were little more than infidel sheep ready to be slaughtered. They realized that the US had a long history of hijackings with nothing done to prevent them aside from hiring someone like former JREF member Optima-1 for seven bucks an hour to "screen" passengers. AQ knew just like we all know today that most "intelligence" is not shared by other agencies and even if memos are written, They get ignored if the guy is higher up on the potential promotion chain than the one getting the memo is. Unless a sound bite can be gleaned from it to make you and your agency look good. AQ thought they had at least a 25% chance of succeeding so they chose four planes. AQ had thought we were paper tigers as little was done about previous bombings, The Cole, etc. And Finally, AQ hated us not because "they hate our freedoms" But for us being the arrogant world policeman that we were and still are, and meddling in their issues in the middle east.

[TruthersLie]

Mothra-hugger! :mad:

two words for you

MOTH RA

:eek:

I fully expect there to be a HUGE part in the LC: final coup...

Ok... fine it was mothra AND gamera at the same time. The telepathic kids were in charge.

[A W Smith]

two words for you

MOTH RA

:eek:

I fully expect there to be a HUGE part in the LC: final coup...

How come no one mentioned Rodan? The flying dinosaur with the beak and huge wings? did he ever get out of his lava pit? That ending was so sad. Almost as sad as the eye patch scientist that went down with his Godzilla (Gogira) and oxygen remover thing that somehow strips mammals of everything but their skeleton. Much to their girlfriends horror.

[TruthersLie]

How come no one mentioned Rodan? The flying dinosaur with the beak and huge wings? did he ever get out of his lava pit? That ending was so sad. Almost as sad as the eye patch scientist that went down with his Godzilla (Gogira) and oxygen remover thing that somehow strips mammals of everything but their skeleton. Much to their girlfriends horror.

No it COULDN"T have been Rodan.

He was creating that huge hurricane off of New York on 9/11.

so he was part of the inside jobby job.

so we have Mothra for the towers and shanksville. Gamera for the pentagon. Rodan for the hurricane off of the coast of New York.

[carlitos]

If you think that you have posted your theory as to "who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed, you are mistaken. You are missing the who, what, when and how, for instance. I note the absence of your co-religionists as well.

[Pardalis]

Which, of course, is not a response to the request to "Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed", but rather a suggestion as to a class of theories that might merit investigation.

Dave

Especially when he admitted believing in MIHOP with 95% certainty.

I'm not very good at math, but 95% is alot, it's 5% short of being absolutely sure.

[eirik]

I thunk that 911Truth did it, and are now just posting the insane methods to sement the public idea that AQ did it. I mean, seriously: Space laser? It's genious! No sane person would suspect it.

Think about it. How do they know all those things about 911? They know TOO much!!/poor tasted humor fail end

[Klimax]

You all obviously missed the conspiracy.

Klimax conspiracy.

Conspiracy to start overtaking of USA,GB,Czech republic,Iraq,Iran,Afghanistan,Somali and Russia as a beginning of the New Klimax World Order!
(Who says that 13 cannot be evile genius...)

Cyborgs will be made as a guardians and supreme Klimax-0 will rule all.With logic!

No destruction of the Old Non-Klimaxed World is necessary.
Population does not need reduciton. Only shipping off to make new colonies...

And those trillions dollars come handy for building supershio Wanderer...

[OldTigerCub]

Mothra!!!???
I slacked off for a few months and now Mothra gets all the credit!! Sheesh....the Alien Reptilian overlords just can't any respect anymore!!! :(

Seriously, though, it's been a few months since I've popped in, having been preoccupied with the real world. It's good to see so many old friends and forum regulars still battling the moon-battery with humor, common sense and real evidence!

Cheers!

OTC

[triforcharity]

Wow, just wow. This thread is almost too much fun. When I have some time, I will post my thoughts on this. But, untill then, I will tell you it won't be as funny.

[Justin39640]

toho studios was an inside job?

i cant believe no one mentioned Ghidrah
c'mon! 3 heads 3 buildings!!!
put a fork in it - this threads done (lol jk)

[carlitos]

bumping for truth

[Myriad]

In the absence of theories presented by actual Truthers, here's how I currently understand the prevailing 9/11 conspiracy theory:

One bright day, in the middle of the night,
Trustworthy traitors with explosive thermite
Put bombs in the basement for top-down collapse,
Then told thousands of Jews, "keep this plan under wraps."
They publicly flaunted their secretive ways
With a twelve-hour power-down that lasted two days.
Then innocent terrorists hijacked planes (four times),
Showing us how the U.S. is guilty of war crimes.
Then bomb-laden holograms flew in their place
(By the FBI, to throw themselves off the case)
Toward four helpless targets that planes couldn't harm.
NORAD defenders stood down in alarm
Then shot down one plane and to Cleveland flew it
To fool all the networks, who already knew it.
The fire chief said "pull it" and pushed towers down
Into their own footprints, for blocks all around.
These pre-taped events were all shown on TV live
(Just like when O'Brien told Winston to see five!)
As part of an idiot's ingenious plan
To fight the Iraqis in Afghanistan.
But because I know nothing, they couldn't deceive me.
I only tell lies to prove you should believe me.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[grmcdorman]

Nice, Myriad.

[Slayhamlet]

In the absence of theories presented by actual Truthers, here's how I currently understand the prevailing 9/11 conspiracy theory:

One bright day, in the middle of the night,
Trustworthy traitors with explosive thermite
Put bombs in the basement for top-down collapse,
Then told thousands of Jews, "keep this plan under wraps."
They publicly flaunted their secretive ways
With a twelve-hour power-down that lasted two days.
Then innocent terrorists hijacked planes (four times),
Showing us how the U.S. is guilty of war crimes.
Then bomb-laden holograms flew in their place
(By the FBI, to throw themselves off the case)
Toward four helpless targets that planes couldn't harm.
NORAD defenders stood down in alarm
Then shot down one plane and to Cleveland flew it
To fool all the networks, who already knew it.
The fire chief said "pull it" and pushed towers down
Into their own footprints, for blocks all around.
These pre-taped events were all shown on TV live
(Just like when O'Brien told Winston to see five!)
As part of an idiot's ingenious plan
To fight the Iraqis in Afghanistan.
But because I know nothing, they couldn't deceive me.
I only tell lies to prove you should believe me.

Respectfully,
Myriad
Bravo. Nominated.

[9/11-investigator]

I agree with the findings of the 9/11 Commission, and the additional information I have read like Lawrence Wright's excellent The Looming Tower. Al Qaeda planned, financed and conducted a terrorist attack on the United States on September 11, 2001, by simultaneously hijacking 4 aircraft and crashing them into 3 out of 4 of their targets. The 4th jet was crashed to the ground once the passengers figured out what was going on. The World Trade Center 1 & 2 suffered structural damage due to plane impact and fires and collapsed. WTC 7 suffered damage from being struck by WTC debris and fire and collapsed.

Here is a thread where those who believe alternative explanations can post their best theory. Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed.

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

Since you ask it so politely here is 'my' theory:

http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

I spent 2 full months (Nov + Dec in 2008, that is 2 months in the 50% income tax range since 2008 was a very successful year) in writing it down with a little intellectual help from my friends here at JREF:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=128473

The reception here was mildly positive :D

Enjoy.

[9/11-investigator]

To me the most suspicius thing about 9/11 was the attempt to get Henry Kissinger to head the 9/11 commission. That suggest there is something to hide.
I find LIHOP very unlikely, but have no trouble believing in Bush and Cheney doing their best to hide criminal incompetence.

So what could that be they are trying to hide?

Toke as a troofer in status nascendi?

[TruthersLie]

Since you ask it so politely here is 'my' theory:

http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

I spent 2 full months (Nov + Dec in 2008, that is 2 months in the 50% income tax range since 2008 was a very successful year) in writing it down with a little intellectual help from my friends here at JREF:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=128473

The reception here was mildly positive :D

Enjoy.

and my reply to that theory is
ROFLMAO.

But thank you for at least trying to put forward a theory....

of course it is wrong from the get go... but hey, it is a theory.

It doesn't change the fact that MOTHRA did it w/out help from dem evil joooooooz.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Since you ask it so politely here is 'my' theory:

http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

I spent 2 full months (Nov + Dec in 2008, that is 2 months in the 50% income tax range since 2008 was a very successful year) in writing it down with a little intellectual help from my friends here at JREF:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=128473

The reception here was mildly positive :D

Enjoy.

It was chock-full of a Mormon's fantasy. You must have converted to Mormonism. I wonder how your Jewish mother will take it when she finds out.

[9/11-investigator]

and my reply to that theory is
ROFLMAO.

But thank you for at least trying to put forward a theory....

of course it is wrong from the get go... but hey, it is a theory.

It doesn't change the fact that MOTHRA did it w/out help from dem evil joooooooz.

From my traffic statistics I can see that you do indeed post from the UAE (and that you still use WinXP with poor man's screen resolution 1280*1024 :D).

Never mind... do you ever discuss 9/11 with the locals? Uhh, are you a local? So what's the prevalent theory in the desert then?

[TruthersLie]

From my traffic statistics I can see that you do indeed post from the UAE (and that you still use WinXP with poor man's screen resolution 1280*1024 :D).

Never mind... do you ever discuss 9/11 with the locals? Uhh, are you a local? So what's the prevalent theory in the desert then?

I have spoken to quite a few of the locals, since I am a college professor here.

Generally we don't discuss 9/11 or the events which led to it.

I often have a class near the beginning of the year with a rabble rouser who wants to get my goat because I am an american. it usually starts with a "I'd really like to meet UBL" or the ever popular "so and so was my cousin/brother and he was a hero (one of the 2 hijackers from Ras Al Khaimah in the UAE). When I ask why, they say because they died for Islam to kill jews. (the younger cousins have said it directly to my face)

And it never fails that when I state that I disagree, but I respect their views because of family respect, the discussion often peters out especially when I won't rise to their bait.

Of course having met the families of the 2 hijackers from RAK, I was apologized to repeatedly for the behavior of both of their sons. They admit their sons flew the jets. They admit that UBL and AQ were behind it.

The majority of folks in the UAE (and in the region) know it was AlQ and UBL. Heck, a great deal of money to support them goes directly through Dubai (it is one big money laundering scheme)

And of course I'm in the UAE, i live and work here.

[Toke]

So what could that be they are trying to hide?

Toke as a troofer in status nascendi?

No, just wishfull thinking on your part.

[9/11-investigator]

When I ask why, they say because they died for Islam to kill jews. (the younger cousins have said it directly to my face)

Well, they did a lousy job then 'hurting the Jews'. Through this action they gave the Americans (or rather the US gov, a subtle difference) an excuse to decapitate one of the most notorious enemies of Israel: Saddam's Iraq. Well, if you believe that story.

Of course having met the families of the 2 hijackers from RAK, I was apologized to repeatedly for the behavior of both of their sons. They admit their sons flew the jets.

The FBI might be interested to learn that the parents of the alleged hijackers did receive one of those mysterious cell phone calls as well.

They admit that UBL and AQ were behind it.

That's what they want to believe, namely being able to give the almighty US a blow. "Are we powerful or what".

And of course I'm in the UAE, i live and work here.

I hope for you that your airco is working properly then.

[9/11-investigator]

No, just wishfull thinking on your part.

Could not care less.

[Klimax]

Well, they did a lousy job then 'hurting the Jews'. Through this action they gave the Americans (or rather the US gov, a subtle difference) an excuse to decapitate one of the most notorious enemies of Israel: Saddam's Iraq. Well, if you believe that story.



The FBI might be interested to learn that the parents of the alleged hijackers did receive one of those mysterious cell phone calls as well.



That's what they want to believe, namely being able to give the almighty US a blow. "Are we powerful or what".



I hope for you that your airco is working properly then.

Spin,which failed. Very,very weak. Get better arguments... (But almost as if I heard the only 911CTer i have ever met!)

[tj15]

Bump...

[cyclonic]

19 young arab men with various sexual hangups were convinced by bin laden that if they did his bidding they could have as many girls/boys/goats/donkeys virgins as they wanted and allah would not judge them, in fact allah would bendover too.

allah would forgive them regardless of what sins they have committed so long as they killed as many innocent people as they could.

[dafydd]

Seven and a half hours into this thread, 28 posts, and the number of Truther responses remains zero.

What did you expect? They refuse to answer my direct questions on other threads.

[dafydd]

Since you ask it so politely here is 'my' theory:

http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com/

I spent 2 full months (Nov + Dec in 2008, that is 2 months in the 50% income tax range since 2008 was a very successful year) in writing it down with a little intellectual help from my friends here at JREF:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=128473

The reception here was mildly positive :D

Enjoy.

Well at least you have a theory,crackpot,but a theory.

[carlitos]

Well at least you have a theory,crackpot,but a theory.
Noted. Actually, I re-visited his site, and there is an interesting point there.

Disclaimer: nobody is guilty until convicted by a court of law. This blog's intent is to stimulate thinking about 9/11 from a different angle than the official one. From day one the blame has been put at bin Laden and his people without real evidence. Today bin Laden is no longer persecuted for 9/11 according to the FBI website. The theory proposed here might be true or false or contain some truth. In the end it must be an official investigation that determines who is guilty and who is not. This blog is dedicated to Italian ex-president Cossiga who is the highest ranking statesman to date who has openly stated that it was the Mossad who has carried out the 9/11 attacks.
End of Disclaimer

So, when KSM is convicted in a court of law, he will be 'guilty' of his role in 9/11. That is helpful.

[jaydeehess]

I only just decided to read some of this thread and thought I would offer my take on the events of 9/11

No doubt in my mind:
- 4 aircraft were hijacked by 19 Islamic Jihadists intent on using these machines in suicide missions to cause as much death and destruction as they could to symbols of American wealth and power
-the damage and death at the Pentagon was caused by the impact of Flight 77
-the death and destruction at the WTC complex was initiated by, and the direct consequence of, the impacts of Flights 11 and 175
- flight 93 crashed into a feild in Penn.

Some details I am not sure of:
-how much did the special fire codes that were in effect for the PANYNJ affect the spread of the tower fires?
-in WTC 7 NIST proposes that expansion caused the girder to be pushed off its seats leading to the initial collapse, did NIST examine steel contraction as a possible cause for this?
- pre-9/11 exactly who knew what and if all this intel could have been put together from all various agencies would the attack have been intercepted?

[Toke]

- pre-9/11 exactly who knew what and if all this intel could have been put together from all various agencies would the attack have been intercepted?

I am sure there are plenty of people who would like a public enquiry into how the various agencies collect and share information.:)

It have been argued that one of the major reasons for secrecy is to hide incompetence, I am sure there is some truth to it.

[carlitos]

I am sure there are plenty of people who would like a public enquiry into how the various agencies collect and share information.:)

It have been argued that one of the major reasons for secrecy is to hide incompetence, I am sure there is some truth to it.

There was a famous memo, and the "Gorelick Wall" was erected between agencies, if memory serves. I think that, after serving on the 9/11 Commission, she got REALLY rich on wall street while Fannie Mae lost zillions. She's probably due to be in the Obama administration now. Plus ça change...

[cyclonic]

- pre-9/11 exactly who knew what and if all this intel could have been put together from all various agencies would the attack have been intercepted?

Judge for yourself
inside 9/11:war on america part 10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do4G2bjVzQ4

inside 9/11:war on america part 11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuau_dFmV2g

[carlitos]

Cross-posted from here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5368898&postcount=594) for convenience and on-topic.

I believe the two aircraft existed but I don't know what happened to them on 9/11. I believe Al Qaeda exists but was set up by western intelligence agencies and still receives orders from them. I don't know if the alleged hijackers existed or not but if they did they were set up. Video footage was faked using cgi cartoon planes.

<snip>
I can give you a quick resume of what I do know after examining the evidence, but I'm not prepared to fill the gaps in by speculating on things I don't know.

1. There were explosions in both towers.
2. A plane was faked live on TV and later more fake plane footage was shown on TV.
3. Several eyewitnesses lied about seeing planes and many of these were employed by the TV companies or had close ties with the media.
4. Three buildings were demolished.
5. TV coverage of the day's events was guided by counter-terrorism analysts in the studios, such as John Miller, Jerome Hauer, Steven Simon and James Rubin, who laid down the foundations for the official conspiracy theory involving Islamic suicide pilots.

[dudalb]

Cross-posted from here (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5368898&postcount=594) for convenience and on-topic.


No Planers are the most amusing people.

And I think I can sum up 9/11 Investigators theory in four words;The Joos Did It.

[twinstead]

No Planers are the most amusing people.


Indeed. IMO it takes a very special kind of crazy to "investigate" 911 and come to the conclusion that the plane was faked on live TV and the eye witnesses are lying. Not just the garden-variety special crazy, either, but a special, special kind of crazy.

[alienentity]

I am sure there are plenty of people who would like a public enquiry into how the various agencies collect and share information.:)

It have been argued that one of the major reasons for secrecy is to hide incompetence, I am sure there is some truth to it.

Yup. And that still won't change the WHO and Why of the perps one bit. Without the hijackers, there would be no 9/11.

[dudalb]

Indeed. IMO it takes a very special kind of crazy to "investigate" 911 and come to the conclusion that the plane was faked on live TV and the eye witnesses are lying. Not just the garden-variety special crazy, either, but a special, special kind of crazy.


Correctamumdo. Even Judy Wood's "Death Ray From Space" theory is not quite as insane as the No Plane Theory.

[Toke]

Yup. And that still won't change the WHO and Why of the perps one bit. Without the hijackers, there would be no 9/11.
No, and I am not claiming that.:)

[TruthersLie]

no, No, NO, NO

I've told you before.

Mothra did it.

[alienentity]

Correctamumdo. Even Judy Wood's "Death Ray From Space" theory is not quite as insane as the No Plane Theory.

I wouldn't be so sure. Haven't you read her 'Hurricane Erin' theory? She's pretty far out there.

[jaydeehess]

Judge for yourself
inside 9/11:war on america part 10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do4G2bjVzQ4

inside 9/11:war on america part 11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuau_dFmV2g

Yes, I've seen that. It does give an outline of what was known but is short on details.

'The system was blinking red' is all fine and dandy but what do you do unless you had actual concrete info on the where, when, how and who concerning these attacks?

It is possible that all of this was known, that someone knew 'something' was planned for the east coast, someone else knew 'something' was planned for Sept 11, and others expected hijackings while still others were highly suspicious of several or all of the 19 AND yet these people did not share or had no way to share, their information with each other.

If a dozen people have pieces of a puzzle but are unaware of each other then the puzzle will not get put together.

BUT....... it is just possible that someone, somewhere, who was higher up in the intel chain, did see all of this and knew Atta was likely planning a hijacking with several others, of multiple aircraft on the eastern seaboard and that these would be suicide missions. Did this person (or office) not react in time and for Nat Security reasons we have not been told they were very close to stopping this? Did this person (or office) simply hesitate or was it put together too late to get the wheels going? ,,,,,,,,, or with a cynical, callous motivation were the attacks simply not stopped?

the last is of course the LIHOP senario and it can also break down in a couple of directions.

1)Perhaps some pieces of the puzzle were still missing. Say they knew that Hanjour and his crew were going to carry out a hijacking but they did not know it would be a suicide mission nor that there were multiple planes involved. The senario now is that this was allowed, let the (ie single) hijacking occur then counter it when they make demands and land elsewhere. Maybe even assume that a few hostages would be killed. This alone would garner action against Al-Qada by the administration and we know that many in the intel feild were frustrated with both Clinton's and Bush's lack of action.

Then on the day of the hijacking this group watches in horror to see that they had allowed not one run-of-the-mill hijacking but 4 suicide mission hijackings.
The CYA would begin immediatly.

I have never seen a TM member offer the above senario. Why? Because it does not demonize their poltical enemies enough for their satisfaction.

2) the senario favoured by a few not quite so crazy TM members, that the entire plan was known at very high levels and still allowed to occur.

There are several things that argue against '2' for sure.
First of all Bush's reaction is one of complete shock, not that of a person waiting for these events to play out at which time he will jump to action, take command and be the hero President.
Second there is the report that Condi Rice told her friend in California not to fly that morning. If true then she obviously did not know the whole plan as all the planes were hijacked from eastern cities. Her friend was in the west and likely would not even take off until later in the day eastern time well after the hijackings had taken place.
Third, Don Rumsfeld was in his office at the Pentagon and I for one do not see him as the type to set himself up for possible martyrdom.
So if the entire operation was known in advance by someone then it was not Bush, Rummy or Rice.

For the first senario though, there are a few tantilizing yet surely inconclusive clues to support it, but its all circumstantial.
Intel agencies were frustrated with lack of action on Islamic threats.
Rice appears to have known there was the possibility of hijackings specifically on Sept 11 somewhere in the USA.
Much of the intel about the hijackers was broadcast to the public before the end of the day on Sept 11 which is pretty quick.

I can see how a conspiratorially minded person could view all of this circumstantial evidence and jump to the conclusion that the attacks were alowed to occur.

[TS-]

Indeed. IMO it takes a very special kind of crazy to "investigate" 911 and come to the conclusion that the plane was faked on live TV and the eye witnesses are lying. Not just the garden-variety special crazy, either, but a special, special kind of crazy.

Completely unrelated to anything in this thread, except for your avatar:

NSFW

Though, I suppose you could say that it relates to no-planers...

yIM4UuD5qnc

[cyclonic]

Yes, I've seen that. It does give an outline of what was known but is short on details.

'The system was blinking red' is all fine and dandy but what do you do unless you had actual concrete info on the where, when, how and who concerning these attacks?

It is possible that all of this was known, that someone knew 'something' was planned for the east coast, someone else knew 'something' was planned for Sept 11, and others expected hijackings while still others were highly suspicious of several or all of the 19 AND yet these people did not share or had no way to share, their information with each other.

If a dozen people have pieces of a puzzle but are unaware of each other then the puzzle will not get put together.

BUT....... it is just possible that someone, somewhere, who was higher up in the intel chain, did see all of this and knew Atta was likely planning a hijacking with several others, of multiple aircraft on the eastern seaboard and that these would be suicide missions. Did this person (or office) not react in time and for Nat Security reasons we have not been told they were very close to stopping this? Did this person (or office) simply hesitate or was it put together too late to get the wheels going? ,,,,,,,,, or with a cynical, callous motivation were the attacks simply not stopped?

the last is of course the LIHOP senario and it can also break down in a couple of directions.

1)Perhaps some pieces of the puzzle were still missing. Say they knew that Hanjour and his crew were going to carry out a hijacking but they did not know it would be a suicide mission nor that there were multiple planes involved. The senario now is that this was allowed, let the (ie single) hijacking occur then counter it when they make demands and land elsewhere. Maybe even assume that a few hostages would be killed. This alone would garner action against Al-Qada by the administration and we know that many in the intel feild were frustrated with both Clinton's and Bush's lack of action.

Then on the day of the hijacking this group watches in horror to see that they had allowed not one run-of-the-mill hijacking but 4 suicide mission hijackings.
The CYA would begin immediatly.

I have never seen a TM member offer the above senario. Why? Because it does not demonize their poltical enemies enough for their satisfaction.

2) the senario favoured by a few not quite so crazy TM members, that the entire plan was known at very high levels and still allowed to occur.

There are several things that argue against '2' for sure.
First of all Bush's reaction is one of complete shock, not that of a person waiting for these events to play out at which time he will jump to action, take command and be the hero President.
Second there is the report that Condi Rice told her friend in California not to fly that morning. If true then she obviously did not know the whole plan as all the planes were hijacked from eastern cities. Her friend was in the west and likely would not even take off until later in the day eastern time well after the hijackings had taken place.
Third, Don Rumsfeld was in his office at the Pentagon and I for one do not see him as the type to set himself up for possible martyrdom.
So if the entire operation was known in advance by someone then it was not Bush, Rummy or Rice.

For the first senario though, there are a few tantilizing yet surely inconclusive clues to support it, but its all circumstantial.
Intel agencies were frustrated with lack of action on Islamic threats.
Rice appears to have known there was the possibility of hijackings specifically on Sept 11 somewhere in the USA.
Much of the intel about the hijackers was broadcast to the public before the end of the day on Sept 11 which is pretty quick.

I can see how a conspiratorially minded person could view all of this circumstantial evidence and jump to the conclusion that the attacks were alowed to occur.

The suicide bombings of the kobar towers,african us enbassies and the uss cole showed al queda has lunatics willing to die for their twisted beliefs.

The algerian terrorist hijacking of flight 8969, an air france a300,on 24 december 1994, was to be used as a missile and flown into the Eiffel tower.

This suicide mission was thwarted when the plane was stormed by french commandos at Marsiells.

So 6 years before 9-11-2001 islamic terrorists were ready to use jetliners as flying bombs and hit civilan targets this should have set off alarm bells at boeing,airbus amd other aircraft manufacturers to make their planes hijack proof.they could consult EL AL israels airline which has only ever had one plane successfully hijacked: EL AL flight 426 on 7-23-68 41 years ago!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Al

president bush ignored that cia memo warning of "bin laden determined to strike in the us" on august 6 2001 which mentions hijackings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuau_dFmV2g

Even if he deployed armed troops to stand guard at airports and warned the public about possible hijackings this would have made the 911 hijackers very insecure and maybe fail their missions.

[Algebra34]

I agree with the findings of the 9/11 Commission, and the additional information I have read like Lawrence Wright's excellent The Looming Tower. Al Qaeda planned, financed and conducted a terrorist attack on the United States on September 11, 2001, by simultaneously hijacking 4 aircraft and crashing them into 3 out of 4 of their targets. The 4th jet was crashed to the ground once the passengers figured out what was going on. The World Trade Center 1 & 2 suffered structural damage due to plane impact and fires and collapsed. WTC 7 suffered damage from being struck by WTC debris and fire and collapsed.

Here is a thread where those who believe alternative explanations can post their best theory. Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed.

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

My theory is that debunkers don't really know what happened on 9/11 anymore than anyone else. They just pretend to. How? With stundies, laughing dogs, cats, trolls, and personal attacks. Always asking someone else for a theory instead of just validating what they claim to know is the truth. The truth about a story that when pressed the debunker doesn't really even seem to know much about.

[UNLoVedRebel]

My theory is that debunkers don't really know what happened on 9/11 anymore than anyone else. They just pretend to.
Bye. :w2:

[tj15]

My theory is that debunkers don't really know what happened on 9/11 anymore than anyone else. They just pretend to. How? With stundies, laughing dogs, cats, trolls, and personal attacks. Always asking someone else for a theory instead of just validating what they claim to know is the truth. The truth about a story that when pressed the debunker doesn't really even seem to know much about.
Do you have a hypothesis?

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I have no theories, I'm completely satisfied with the physcial evidence proving that 9/11's not an "Inside Job".

[Algebra34]

Do you have a hypothesis?

About what happened on 9/11? No. There is not enough solid information to make a hypothesis.

[tj15]

About what happened on 9/11? No. There is not enough solid information to make a hypothesis.

There is at least enough information out there for you to give a hypothesis that is at least possible.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

About what happened on 9/11? No. There is not enough solid information to make a hypothesis.

"solid information" = no evidence!

THANKS!

[tj15]

Algebra34... Speculate for a minute... I'm not even asking you to fully prove your hypothesis.

What was the conspirators' plan?

[tj15]

Every truther should have a hypothesis for what they think happened... I know that if I thought that 9/11 was an inside job, I would definitely have a hypothesis that was extremely detailed.

[Algebra34]

Algebra34... Speculate for a minute... I'm not even asking you to fully prove your hypothesis.

What was the conspirators' plan?

What conspirators?

[tj15]

What conspirators?
Whoever you think carried out the inside job.

[Algebra34]

Every truther should have a hypothesis for what they think happened... I know that if I thought that 9/11 was an inside job, I would definitely have a hypothesis that was extremely detailed.

I don't remember claiming to know 9/11 was an inside job. I claim debunkers can't back up their hypothesis. And most debunkers don't just claim an hypothesis. They claim their story is a fact.

[tj15]

I don't remember claiming to know 9/11 was an inside job. I claim debunkers can't back up their hypothesis.

So do you think 9/11 was an inside job or not?

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I don't remember claiming to know 9/11 was an inside job. I claim debunkers can't back up their hypothesis.

You're just trolling Algie! Grow the hell up!

[Algebra34]

So do you think 9/11 was an inside job or not?

I think I don't know. I think you don't know. But you claim you do know when you can't possibly.

[Algebra34]

Whoever you think carried out the inside job.

I don't know who carried out 9/11 and neither do you.

[tj15]

I don't know who carried out 9/11 and neither do you.
So your best guess is "I don't know"?

[AJM8125]

I don't know who carried out 9/11 and neither do you.

I do.

[Myriad]

I don't know who carried out 9/11 and neither do you.


Well, I must say you're doing an excellent job of supporting your lack of hypothesis with good solid lack of evidence.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[R.Mackey]

So your best guess is "I don't know"?

Just another textbook example of the denialist mindset.

They aren't even interested in finding an answer. All they care about is creating doubt and confusion, if possible by obscuring or destroying that answer.

It isn't science. It is, in fact, the exact opposite of science.

Why they do this is complicated. Some do it because, once doubt exists, their own pet idea can appear to be more reasonable (viz. equivocation). But there are those, such as our little pest in this thread, who don't even have a pet idea at all. These individuals seem to have no motivation other than spite, the poor students jealous of or denying knowledge that more industrious people have acquired. Their only goal is intellectual vandalism, and ultimate victory for them means dumbing down the entire human race.

I wouldn't call this mindset "evil," per se, but it is an extreme and unfortunate confluence of chaos, anarchy, and nihilism. They are those who take up the banner of "Ignorance is Strength" without even a whiff of irony.

Fortunately for civilization, they tend to be lazy as well.

[UNLoVedRebel]

My theory is that debunkers don't really know what happened on 9/11 anymore than anyone else. They just pretend to.
We had another poster here with the same twisted logic. I'll tell you the same thing I told him/her. Your "logic" makes no sense.
I claim debunkers don't know what happened on 9/11 anymore then I do they just pretend they do.

[Redtail]

I do.

Me too.

[Algebra34]

Bye. :w2:

Hi. :w2:

[Furcifer]

I don't remember claiming to know 9/11 was an inside job.

I don't think anyone claimed you know anything. What we do know is after 8 years is there's nobody actually paying any attention to this lame conspiracy. That's why you're here.

[JimBenArm]

My theory is that rogue submarines surfaced inside the towers. They then did an emergency deep, which drug the towers down with them. My proof? The squibs. They look suspiciously like the vents on main ballast tanks when a boat dives, so therefore that's what happened.

[Oliver]

My scenario is this one:

"Ha ha, Obama threatening us? ... He and what army? ... And even if, an attack would be great to get rid of Saddam".

[tj15]

I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...

[NutCracker]

I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...

It's not about being right. It is about the evil government and its mouthpieces being wrong.

[tj15]

It's not about being right. It is about the evil government and its mouthpieces being wrong.

OK, you don't have to be 100% correct in your hypothesis... Just give a hypothesis that you think probably happened. Speculate. I'm not even asking you to PROVE your hypothesis.

[NutCracker]

OK, you don't have to be 100% correct in your hypothesis... Just give a hypothesis that you think probably happened. Speculate. I'm not even asking you to PROVE your hypothesis.

My hypothesis on 9/11? I think 19 brain washed, hate filled, Islamic radicals hijacked 4 wide body jets, succeeded in crashing 3 of those into buildings that symbolize the USA. Two of these buildings subsequently collapsed to the ground, triggering the collapse of a building not impacted by the airplanes, damaging surrounding buildings. The third building struck collapsed partially. All caused unspeakable sorrow and terrible loss of life.

It seems I should have added a smiley of some sort to my post.

To clarify my comment. I was just commenting on how Truthers think. Part of the reason I have been in the debunking bushiness is to figure out how denialism works. I believe that distrust serves as the substrate on which denialism feeds and that at least some of the individuals are in moon-hoax and 9/11 truther territory for the personal gratification they get from it. It allows them to think of themselves as "deep, independent thinkers" that take nothing for granted. Standing up to a powerful organization like NASA, the government or the NWO by seeing through its evil ways makes them significant and powerful.

Well, that's my working hypothesis in a nutshell on denialism.

[AJM8125]

My theory is that rogue submarines surfaced inside the towers. They then did an emergency deep, which drug the towers down with them. My proof? The squibs. They look suspiciously like the vents on main ballast tanks when a boat dives, so therefore that's what happened.

Interesting theory. I suppose it could be worked out. Just as the holograms crashed into the buildings, a SEAL team blows up the PATH tube, flooding the basements to allow the submarines ingress to their targets. Once inside, they deliver their payloads of nanotermites, smoke generators, and pyroclastic flow pods. Fogetting to kill William Rodriguez, the subs egress and disappear into the Hudson. Meanwhile, a fleet of freighters swing into action and deposit an exact replica of the PATH tube in segments,which are then put together by the SEAL team waiting below.


Brilliant.

JimBenArm did 9/11.

[ElMondoHummus]

While this may not fit the spirit of the OP: There could me many "theories" (in reality, hypotheses) about 9/11, but they need to fit the facts. And the facts consist of the jets being hijacked and rammed into buildings, and the aftermath being due to these rammings. No proposal that fails to accept these as basic facts is credible.

[ElMondoHummus]

Interesting theory. I suppose it could be worked out. Just as the holograms crashed into the buildings, a SEAL team blows up the PATH tube, flooding the basements to allow the submarines to inX gress their targets. Once inside, they deliver their payloads of nanotermites, smoke generators, and pyroclastic flow pods. Fogetting to kill William Rodriguez, the subs egress and disappear into the Hudson. Meanwhile, a fleet of freighters swing into action and deposit an exact replica of the PATH tube in segments,which are then put together by the SEAL team waiting below.


Brilliant.

JimBenarm did 9/11.

JimBenArm does everyone. :cool:

[Furcifer]

I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...

Having no basis in reality they can't come to a concensus. It's just a series of stupid questions.

[tj15]

My hypothesis on 9/11? I think 19 brain washed, hate filled, Islamic radicals hijacked 4 wide body jets, succeeded in crashing 3 of those into buildings that symbolize the USA. Two of these buildings subsequently collapsed to the ground, triggering the collapse of a building not impacted by the airplanes, damaging surrounding buildings. The third building struck collapsed partially. All caused unspeakable sorrow and terrible loss of life.

It seems I should have added a smiley of some sort to my post.

To clarify my comment. I was just commenting on how Truthers think. Part of the reason I have been in the debunking bushiness is to figure out how denialism works. I believe that distrust serves as the substrate on which denialism feeds and that at least some of the individuals are in moon-hoax and 9/11 truther territory for the personal gratification they get from it. It allows them to think of themselves as "deep, independent thinkers" that take nothing for granted. Standing up to a powerful organization like NASA, the government or the NWO by seeing through its evil ways makes them significant and powerful.

Well, that's my working hypothesis in a nutshell on denialism.

Oops... I think I misunderstood your earlier post. Sorry.

[aggle-rithm]

Here is what I would like to ask Dylan Avery:

"If you were to make a movie dramatizing the 9/11 attacks and how they were carried out, what would the plot be?"

He would then be faced with the embarrassment of admitting that he, as an aspiring filmmaker, couldn't think of anything.

[dafydd]

Here is what I would like to ask Dylan Avery:

"If you were to make a movie dramatizing the 9/11 attacks and how they were carried out, what would the plot be?"

He would then be faced with the embarrassment of admitting that he, as an aspiring filmmaker, couldn't think of anything.

That is a very good question.I wonder what our resident truthers scenarios would look like? Not that I'm expecting an answer from them,they have nothing .

[Kestrel]

Here is what I would like to ask Dylan Avery:

"If you were to make a movie dramatizing the 9/11 attacks and how they were carried out, what would the plot be?"

He would then be faced with the embarrassment of admitting that he, as an aspiring filmmaker, couldn't think of anything.

I doubt even Olivier Stone could make a believable movie out of the no-plane theories.

[jaydeehess]

My theory is that debunkers don't really know what happened on 9/11 anymore than anyone else. They just pretend to. How? With stundies, laughing dogs, cats, trolls, and personal attacks. Always asking someone else for a theory instead of just validating what they claim to know is the truth. The truth about a story that when pressed the debunker doesn't really even seem to know much about.


How odd that you would post this a few hours after my above post and 20 minutes after carlitos response to it.

One could take away from this that you simply ignore more substantive posts from debunkers in favour of concentrating on shorter posts and/or ones which focus on derision of the TM.

[jaydeehess]

I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...

In post 135(click the arrow). I outlined a somewhat more probable conspiracy than faked planes, faked live, and other, videos, bombs and thermite.

carlitos responded, able and ready to discuss this. No truther touched it.

Whereas a LIHOP senario is, IMHO, much more probable than the Rube-Goldberg-ish machinations of the TM's MIHOP senarios, it is instructive of the mindset of the TM in general that they almost exclusively eschew a LIHOP contention.

[Edx]

I doubt even Olivier Stone could make a believable movie out of the no-plane theories.

I wonder if anyone will make a 911 CT movie like JFK in the future.

[jaydeehess]

While this may not fit the spirit of the OP: There could me many "theories" (in reality, hypotheses) about 9/11, but they need to fit the facts. And the facts consist of the jets being hijacked and rammed into buildings, and the aftermath being due to these rammings. No proposal that fails to accept these as basic facts is credible.

My own nit pick---

Unless a senario includes concrete evidence to bolster it I prefer the word 'contention' as opposed to 'hypothesis'.

'To contend' connotes, to me, that this is purely the opinion of the person and not neccessarily bolstered by any evidence. A hypothesis, again to my mind, connotes a senario designed to reasonably mesh with all available evidence.

[cyclonic]

I seriously don't understand why truthers are so against giving a hypothesis as to what they think happened. This seems easy...

Most truthers wouldn't know what 'hypothesis' means.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

I wonder if anyone will make a 911 CT movie like JFK in the future.

God forbid if that happens! Oliver Stones JFK is entertainment, as far as I know. Flight 93 atleast captured the real events that happened to the flight.

We need someone like James Cameron to capture 9/11 in its true form. If another Truther ever thinks of messing up 9/11, there's going to be alot of negative reviews for it, just like Loose Change.

[jaydeehess]

Here is what I would like to ask Dylan Avery:

"If you were to make a movie dramatizing the 9/11 attacks and how they were carried out, what would the plot be?"

He would then be faced with the embarrassment of admitting that he, as an aspiring filmmaker, couldn't think of anything.

My take would be that he could think of something but it would require that he commit to that something and disgard many other senarios. That is something that many in the TM are loath to do. that is why they will defend several mutually exclusive contentions.

Its the 'you don't know for sure, no one does' POV. Its the same POV that, when taken to the extreme, allows them to seriously speculate that dramatic movies such as "Star Trek" or "The Matrix" are docuementaries. Its a POV that removes the requirement of falsifiability.

[jaydeehess]

Most truthers wouldn't know what 'hypothesis' means.

hmmmm, musing, musing,,,,,,,

'hypo' would denote something that is compact, small, concise and 'thesis' is a disseratation based upon reaserch

Would the complicated contentions of the TM be better described as 'hypertheses'?:D

[cyclonic]

Hypo--hypodermic needle.....

Thesis---feces...........

Conclusion-----doh!......

[Edx]

God forbid if that happens! Oliver Stones JFK is entertainment, as far as I know. Flight 93 atleast captured the real events that happened to the flight.

We need someone like James Cameron to capture 9/11 in its true form. If another Truther ever thinks of messing up 9/11, there's going to be alot of negative reviews for it, just like Loose Change.

They should have a 911 CT film but at the end the twist is that Richard Gage is a reptilian.

[1stClassAlan]

Since you ask it so politely here is 'my' theory:

how911wasdone.blogspot

I spent 2 full months (Nov + Dec in 2008, that is 2 months in the 50% income tax range since 2008 was a very successful year) in writing it down with a little intellectual help from my friends here at JREF:

forums.randi.org/showthread.php?

The reception here was mildly positive :D

Enjoy.


Well, I reached the video in the blog spot in which the voiceover referred to obviously gas cut steelwork as evidence of explosive cutter charges before my scoff alarm kicked in. Virtually all the core columns were still standing for some height from ground level AFTER the collapses and were subsequently cut down by on site demolition teams to safeguard workers.

Anyone who mentions thermitic chemicals and shaped cutter charges as being the same thing clearly has NO understanding of how either substances work. Apologies if similar debunking has already been filed.

.

[1stClassAlan]

I only just decided to read some of this thread and thought I would offer my take on the events of 9/11

No doubt in my mind:
- 4 aircraft were hijacked by 19 Islamic Jihadists intent on using these machines in suicide missions to cause as much death and destruction as they could to symbols of American wealth and power
-the damage and death at the Pentagon was caused by the impact of Flight 77
-the death and destruction at the WTC complex was initiated by, and the direct consequence of, the impacts of Flights 11 and 175
- flight 93 crashed into a feild in Penn.

Some details I am not sure of:
-how much did the special fire codes that were in effect for the PANYNJ affect the spread of the tower fires?


Oh, Jaydee - I feel you've hit a whole bunch of nails on their heads with that one !
As a thirty year building veteran in the U.K. I looked in horror at the speed at which the fire spread in both Towers and have absolutely no doubt that no such laxed attitudes to fire resistance will be tolerated in any future buildings.

[ElMondoHummus]

My own nit pick---

Unless a senario includes concrete evidence to bolster it I prefer the word 'contention' as opposed to 'hypothesis'.

'To contend' connotes, to me, that this is purely the opinion of the person and not neccessarily bolstered by any evidence. A hypothesis, again to my mind, connotes a senario designed to reasonably mesh with all available evidence.

That's a fair point. I was using "hypothesis" in the loosest sense possible, which was simply to denote a proposed concept extending from nothing more than one or two simple arguments prior to considering evidence or context. You're right, though, even that gives conspiracy fantasies too much credit for logic. Even my normal word choice - proposal - is too lenient and forgiving. What these conspiracy "hypotheses" end up being are attempts to distort and dissuade. Nothing more. Even many of the resident truthers here have openly stated that their objective is little more than to instill doubt about the shibboleth they call the "official story". So there's no need to use terminology implying that they're trying to build knowledge, or even a coherent argument. At best, with few exceptions (Steven Jones, admittedly) all they're trying to do is negate. So sure, even hypothesis is a term that bestows too much credit on them. I can agree with that.

[ElMondoHummus]

Some details I am not sure of:
-how much did the special fire codes that were in effect for the PANYNJ affect the spread of the tower fires?

The NIST reports do discuss those code differences quite a bit. NCSTAR 1-1, chapter 4 has quite a lot on this, and from what I can tell, it's only the start in that series of reports. I will have to defer to engineers and architects here in the forum on this, but I take it that the deviations from standards set in normal NY City Codes (which the PANYNJ weren't obligated to follow, BTW) weren't relaxations of standards as much as they were simply different standards. Correct me if I'm wrong, though; I'm no engineer. Anyway, the NIST reports do cover this. It's just dense reading, but the info is there.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

They should have a 911 CT film but at the end the twist is that Richard Gage is a reptilian.

:dl: @ imagining Gage as a giant reptile!

[cyclonic]

:dl: @ imagining Gage as a giant reptile!

I imagine him more like a circus seal who gets thrown a salted fish if he performs twoofer tricks.

Z2-OSiCqf-I

Sounds just like him!

Same shiny head too.

[Kestrel]

Oh, Jaydee - I feel you've hit a whole bunch of nails on their heads with that one !
As a thirty year building veteran in the U.K. I looked in horror at the speed at which the fire spread in both Towers and have absolutely no doubt that no such laxed attitudes to fire resistance will be tolerated in any future buildings.

Crash a fuel laden heavy jet into any occupied UK office building in a way that destroys the pipes for the sprinkler system and the fire would also spread quickly.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

i imagine him more like a circus seal who gets thrown a salted fish if he performs twoofer tricks.

z2-osicqf-i

sounds just like him!

Same shiny head too.

lmfao! :D

[gumboot]

Hi Cyclonic,

Major problems with your analysis.


The suicide bombings of the kobar towers,african us enbassies and the uss cole showed al queda has lunatics willing to die for their twisted beliefs.

Hardly anything new or surprising. Wahhabi/Deobandi Muslims have been sacrificing themselves to convert the globe to Islam for over two hundred years.


The algerian terrorist hijacking of flight 8969, an air france a300,on 24 december 1994, was to be used as a missile and flown into the Eiffel tower.


This is incorrect. There is some suspicion that the hijackers intended to blow up the airliner over the Eiffel Tower, however the sources for this claim are questionable, and the behaviour of the hijackers makes this explanation unlikely. More likely it was an alternative ending if their demands weren't met.


So 6 years before 9-11-2001 islamic terrorists were ready to use jetliners as flying bombs and hit civilan targets this should have set off alarm bells at boeing,airbus amd other aircraft manufacturers to make their planes hijack proof.

Until 9/11 airline hijackers (including GIA) had consistently shown a reluctance to kill passengers, preferring to use them as hostages. Locking hijackers out of the cockpit would simply have encouraged them to execute passengers who otherwise could have been saved.

(Prior to 9/11 your odds of surviving an airline hijacking were actually pretty good)



president bush ignored that cia memo warning of "bin laden determined to strike in the us" on august 6 2001 which mentions hijackings.

You've obviously never actually read the memo. It referred to three-year old intelligence that was so vague as to be utterly meaningless. Worse, it suggested that law enforcement had the situation under control.


Even if he deployed armed troops to stand guard at airports and warned the public about possible hijackings this would have made the 911 hijackers very insecure and maybe fail their missions.

Yeah I bet Americans would have loved that. :rolleyes:

[Sam.I.Am]

Can you imagine the customers reactions if you told them to add an hour to their boarding time, that they had to take off their shoes and belts, no liquids were allowed in their carry ons, no lighters were allowed and that their loved ones couldn't say goodbye/welcome them at the gate on 9/10/01? That wouldn't last very long at all.

[Jackanory]

I believe that 19 Arab hijackers, as part of Al Qaeda, and working at the behest of OBL, carried out the 9/11 attacks. In preparation for their attacks they were possibly assisted by members of Saudi and Pakistani Intelligence. I believe that they were able to successfully carry out their attacks because of (A) A sense of invulnerability held by the USG and its agencies at the time, (B) Animosity between intelligence agencies, and (C) lack of preparation (ATC/NATO/NEADS/FAA) in dealing with four simultaneous hijackings, where the planes were used as missiles.

TAM:)
TAM:)

I concur with TAM. Those US living, peniless and uneducated cave dwellers made an audacious plan and learned to fly.

As a side note though - I have always believed that from a planning and strategic point of view (or simply common sense) that an inside job carried out by the USG or Jews or NWO would have best been done at night, rather than in broad daylight and on the clearest and brightest day in September.

Imagine the night time senario. Absolutely perfect for an inside gubmint job.

No live news footage. No tourist photographs. No eye witnesses and the president tucked up in bed asleep rather than at a school and open to speculation of foreknowledge etc etc etc.

Or is it more likely that those cave dwelling terrorists couldnt cope with flying at night as they simply couldnt navigate in the dark. You tube would be dead had it been a nightime attack. The TM would be dead without youtube. Long live Youtube for the entertainment value given for so long by so few.

[tj15]

Did the terrorists use the on board instruments in the plane to navigate their way to the targets or some other way of navigation (I know nothing about flying)?

[twinstead]

Imagine the night time senario. Absolutely perfect for an inside gubmint job.


Ah, but that's what they WAN'T us to think. Diabolically clever, that NWO ;)

[aggle-rithm]

Did the terrorists use the on board instruments in the plane to navigate their way to the targets or some other way of navigation (I know nothing about flying)?

They used major landmarks such as the Hudson River to navigate. They probably practiced on Microsoft Flight Simulator or some similar cheap software.

[jaydeehess]

Can you imagine the customers reactions if you told them to add an hour to their boarding time, that they had to take off their shoes and belts, no liquids were allowed in their carry ons, no lighters were allowed and that their loved ones couldn't say goodbye/welcome them at the gate on 9/10/01?

Doesn't that describe El-Al? (if you increase the time prior to boarding even more)

[jaydeehess]

Oh, Jaydee - I feel you've hit a whole bunch of nails on their heads with that one !
As a thirty year building veteran in the U.K. I looked in horror at the speed at which the fire spread in both Towers and have absolutely no doubt that no such laxed attitudes to fire resistance will be tolerated in any future buildings.

Crash a fuel laden heavy jet into any occupied UK office building in a way that destroys the pipes for the sprinkler system and the fire would also spread quickly.

If Allan is referring to the spread after the jet fuel had burned off its a valid point. Obviously no one ever designs a building with the idea that several thousand gallons of acellerant would be distributed over several floors and ignited in the space of 1 second. Not much one can do to keep fire from spreading quickly when a large volume of acellerant is used.

However it then spread to floors not involved in the initial impact and the fire insulation was significantly abraded by the impact on the impact floors.
I forget now just how the fire codes differed. I do recall that Dr. Quintere had issues with the NIST report's dealings with this aspect. IIRC his beef was mostly that he thought it was not dealt with deeply enough and if there were 'sweetheart' deals made that affected safety he wanted names named.

In the new WTC 7 IIRC the sprinkler pipes are protected by concrete walls, in the towers they were protected by gyproc walls.

[jaydeehess]

That's a fair point. I was using "hypothesis" in the loosest sense possible, which was simply to denote a proposed concept extending from nothing more than one or two simple arguments prior to considering evidence or context. You're right, though, even that gives conspiracy fantasies too much credit for logic. Even my normal word choice - proposal - is too lenient and forgiving. What these conspiracy "hypotheses" end up being are attempts to distort and dissuade. Nothing more. Even many of the resident truthers here have openly stated that their objective is little more than to instill doubt about the shibboleth they call the "official story". So there's no need to use terminology implying that they're trying to build knowledge, or even a coherent argument. At best, with few exceptions (Steven Jones, admittedly) all they're trying to do is negate. So sure, even hypothesis is a term that bestows too much credit on them. I can agree with that.

"Proposal",,,,,,,,, I don't mind that but I will still use my choice of "contention" or "bald contention", bereft of any significant evidence and springing unbidden and purely from the imagination of a mind driven by paranoia and a set political world view.

[jaydeehess]

Hi Cyclonic,

Hardly anything new or surprising. Wahhabi/Deobandi Muslims have been sacrificing themselves to convert the globe to Islam for over two hundred years.


This is incorrect. There is some suspicion that the hijackers intended to blow up the airliner over the Eiffel Tower, however the sources for this claim are questionable, and the behaviour of the hijackers makes this explanation unlikely. More likely it was an alternative ending if their demands weren't met.


Until 9/11 airline hijackers (including GIA) had consistently shown a reluctance to kill passengers, preferring to use them as hostages. Locking hijackers out of the cockpit would simply have encouraged them to execute passengers who otherwise could have been saved.

(Prior to 9/11 your odds of surviving an airline hijacking were actually pretty good)

You've obviously never actually read the memo. It referred to three-year old intelligence that was so vague as to be utterly meaningless. Worse, it suggested that law enforcement had the situation under control.

That was the point I was making, that unless there was truely specific intel on these attacks it would be nigh on impossible to have intercepted and foiled them.

Yes, Islamic fundementalists had hijacked many and aircraft, even coordinated multiple hijackings, in the past 40 years or so, and yes, Islamic Jihadists had carried out suicide bombings against their perceived enemies quite often over the last 40 years or so.

These facts argue for the hypothesis that the two ideas were combined into a multiple coordinated hijacking of several aircraft and using them all as suicide attack weapons.

As I noted though, there are some anecdotes that suggest some specificity was known. Rice warning not to fly on Sept 11. Though this suggests she knew when and how, she did not known where and the USA is a big place.


Yeah I bet Americans would have loved that. :rolleyes:

Reaction 1) Yell and scream, Alex Jones proclaiming 'police state' and 'travel restrictions' --- best nazi voice "payh-paas pleeze!"
Reaction 2) People just not bothering to fly. (pun alert) A flight away from air travel.

[BasqueArch]

I doubt even Olivier Stone could make a believable movie out of the no-plane theories.

I saw the movie in Tehran, wasn't convincing, even the audience booed.

New Oliver Stone 9/11 Film Introduces 'Single Plane' Theory

August 8, 2006 | Issue 42•32
New Oliver Stone 9/11 Film Introduces 'Single Plane' Theory Twitter


NEW YORK—Academy Award-winning director Oliver Stone said Monday that his new film World Trade Center unveils "compelling and controversial" new evidence that a single plane was responsible for all four collisions in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania on Sept. 11, 2001.

"There's no way anyone can ever deny there was only one plane."

"Get ready to go through the looking glass here, people," Stone told reporters at a Manhattan press conference before an advance screening of the movie, which premieres Wednesday. "The film you are about to see is going to blow the lid off the 9/11 Commission's official report and expose a conspiracy that reaches the highest levels of government."

World Trade Center, which stars Nicolas Cage as a dedicated Port Authority officer who stumbles on secret evidence amid the rubble and carnage of the terrorist attack, tells a story quite different from what Stone called "the official government line" about the event. According to the film, at 8:46 a.m., a lone commercial airliner flew diagonally through the North Tower of the World Trade Center, maintained a circular holding pattern for approximately 17 minutes, then struck the South Tower before heading to the Pentagon.

After its collision with the center of American military operations, the so-called "magic plane"—which variously and ingeniously identified itself to air-traffic controllers as "American Airlines Flight 11," "United Airlines Flight 175," "American Airlines Flight 77" and "United Airlines Flight 93"—took to the skies once again, landing at a top-secret "black-ops" Air Force base in West Virginia, where it was reloaded with a group of clones from another shadowy government program that Stone described as "shocking."

Stone, who said he did not have time to explore the clone angle in the three-and-a-half-hour film, plans to do so in the sequel, September 12.
....

<snip>

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Oliver-Stone%27s-Jump-Map-R_0.jpg

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/new_oliver_stone_9_11_film

[tj15]

They used major landmarks such as the Hudson River to navigate. They probably practiced on Microsoft Flight Simulator or some similar cheap software.

That's what I was thinking for when they were close, but what about when they were far away? I'm guessing they could have just gone east.

[TruthersLie]

That's what I was thinking for when they were close, but what about when they were far away? I'm guessing they could have just gone east.

TJ..

Please remember they were trained pilots. And they had trained for this mission for a while.

They could have had maps with them, or used the onboard instruments to hone in on their targets.

Unlike what twoofs spew, they were trained pilots with hundreds of hours of flight time.

[cyclonic]

Hi Cyclonic,

Major problems with your analysis.
There is some suspicion that the hijackers intended to blow up the airliner over the Eiffel Tower, however the sources for this claim are questionable, and the behaviour of the hijackers makes this explanation unlikely. More likely it was an alternative ending if their demands weren't met.

prior 9/11 airline hijackers (including GIA) had consistently shown a reluctance to kill passengers, preferring to use them as hostages. Locking hijackers out of the cockpit would simply have encouraged them to execute passengers who otherwise could have been saved.

(Prior to 9/11 your odds of surviving an airline hijacking were actually pretty good)


hi gumboot
The plane needed 9 tonnes of fuel to get to paris from marsielles, they demanded tanks be filled : 27 tonnes.

The french prime minister certainly believed it, he ordered the storming of the plane by french commandos which was highly successful.
the aircraft was NOT to be allowed to takeoff.

how many passengers were shot on the tarmac at algiers by the GIA while trying to get permission to takeoff? 3-4?


about that august 6 memo to president bush, i doubt a CIA memo to bush will ever be made public and i certainly don't believe it contained 3 year old intelligence.

cheers

[tj15]

TJ..

Please remember they were trained pilots. And they had trained for this mission for a while.

They could have had maps with them, or used the onboard instruments to hone in on their targets.

Unlike what twoofs spew, they were trained pilots with hundreds of hours of flight time.
I had just never seen any detailed information about what the terrorists might have done in order to get to their targets... I'm just curious.

[jaydeehess]

i saw the movie in tehran, wasn't convincing, even the audience booed.

new oliver stone 9/11 film introduces 'single plane' theory

august 8, 2006 | issue 42•32
new oliver stone 9/11 film introduces 'single plane' theory twitter


new york—academy award-winning director oliver stone said monday that his new film world trade center unveils "compelling and controversial" new evidence that a single plane was responsible for all four collisions in new york, washington, d.c., and pennsylvania on sept. 11, 2001.

"there's no way anyone can ever deny there was only one plane."

"get ready to go through the looking glass here, people," stone told reporters at a manhattan press conference before an advance screening of the movie, which premieres wednesday. "the film you are about to see is going to blow the lid off the 9/11 commission's official report and expose a conspiracy that reaches the highest levels of government."

world trade center, which stars nicolas cage as a dedicated port authority officer who stumbles on secret evidence amid the rubble and carnage of the terrorist attack, tells a story quite different from what stone called "the official government line" about the event. According to the film, at 8:46 a.m., a lone commercial airliner flew diagonally through the north tower of the world trade center, maintained a circular holding pattern for approximately 17 minutes, then struck the south tower before heading to the pentagon.

After its collision with the center of american military operations, the so-called "magic plane"—which variously and ingeniously identified itself to air-traffic controllers as "american airlines flight 11," "united airlines flight 175," "american airlines flight 77" and "united airlines flight 93"—took to the skies once again, landing at a top-secret "black-ops" air force base in west virginia, where it was reloaded with a group of clones from another shadowy government program that stone described as "shocking."

stone, who said he did not have time to explore the clone angle in the three-and-a-half-hour film, plans to do so in the sequel, september 12.
....

<snip>

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/oliver-stone%27s-jump-map-r_0.jpg

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/new_oliver_stone_9_11_film

its........all.......so clear......... now! :D

[Kestrel]

I had just never seen any detailed information about what the terrorists might have done in order to get to their targets... I'm just curious.

Modern airliners have sophisticated autopilot systems. Just set the coordinates of your destination and the autopilot will fly the aircraft to that place. About as easy to use as the GPS navigation units in cars.

[jaydeehess]

Modern airliners have sophisticated autopilot systems. Just set the coordinates of your destination and the autopilot will fly the aircraft to that place. About as easy to use as the GPS navigation units in cars.

True, but these planes used INS , not GPS.

Still, the VFR bush pilots I have had fly me around the northern boreal forest use a combination of dead reckoning and a map showing the lakes (look down note the shape o a lake, look at map for a lake of that shape) enroute to tiny villages that do not have roads or railways into them.

Certainly they are experienced in doing it this way but how much easier would it be to look for NYC when all that is east of it is ocean and a major waterway leads to it; taking into account that NYC is a city with a magnificent skyline compared to the villages I have been to with populations numbered in the hundreds rather than in the millions.

They were headed west when they took the plane, all targets are basically east. Even a cave dweller can look at a compass, and even a cave dweller can look down and recognize a major river.

Once close to Manhattan (a large island!) all they had to do was look for the tallest structures on the skyline with the ocean as a backdrop. The second plane had a huge plume of smoke to guide it.

In fact of the three planes that hit buildings the one with the most trouble was Hanjour on Flt 77. He did not seem to see the Pentagon until he was almost on top of it and had to do a circling descent. The biggest difference between the towers and the Pentagon is that the Pentagon is only 77 feet high as opposed to the 1000+ of the towers. What the Pentagon did have was that it is, obviously, a very large unigue shape and it did lie against a major waterway. So it was easy to spot once close but harder to see from far away whereas the towers were easier to pick out from a greater distance.

Given that the three buildings that were hit were all very distinguishable from the air, AND world wide symbols of American wealth and power, one wonders what the target of Flt 93 was. It most certainly was not WTC 7 since it was not particularily well known or a symbol of America, nor particularily distinguishable from the air.
The Whitehouse? Maybe, but it is a fairly small structure nestled in trees. Its a prime symbol of power but relatively hard to find.
For my money it was the Capitol building. Large, domed and the tallest structure for miles (IIRC), and certainly a symbol of American political power.

[Kestrel]

Given that the three buildings that were hit were all very distinguishable from the air, AND world wide symbols of American wealth and power, one wonders what the target of Flt 93 was. It most certainly was not WTC 7 since it was not particularily well known or a symbol of America, nor particularily distinguishable from the air.
The Whitehouse? Maybe, but it is a fairly small structure nestled in trees. Its a prime symbol of power but relatively hard to find.
For my money it was the Capitol building. Large, domed and the tallest structure for miles (IIRC), and certainly a symbol of American political power.

The Washington Monument is actually taller, but that just would help the terrorists find the Capitol. It's due East of that big pointy thing.

There is something else to mention. Simply by reading the newspapers, the terrorists would also have known that both houses of Congress were in session on 9/11. A much better target than the White House on a day the President was known to be out of town.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

The Washington Monument is actually taller, but that just would help the terrorists find the Capitol. It's due East of that big pointy thing.

There is something else to mention. Simply by reading the newspapers, the terrorists would also have known that both houses of Congress were in session on 9/11. A much better target than the White House on a day the President was known to be out of town.

I think the word you're looking for is "obelisk".

But yeah, Flight 93's target would've been the White House or the Capital Building. But it's likely they would've gotten the Capital Building because that suckers massive.

The dome on it was being built during the Civil War.

[gumboot]

hi gumboot
The plane needed 9 tonnes of fuel to get to paris from marsielles, they demanded tanks be filled : 27 tonnes.

There's speculation that they eventually intended to fly to a Muslim-friendly country.



The french prime minister certainly believed it, he ordered the storming of the plane by french commandos which was highly successful.
the aircraft was NOT to be allowed to takeoff.

The French quite clearly intended to storm the plane right from the outset.


how many passengers were shot on the tarmac at algiers by the GIA while trying to get permission to takeoff? 3-4?

According to some of the hostages, the hijackers displayed increasing reluctance to kill as time went on.


about that august 6 memo to president bush, i doubt a CIA memo to bush will ever be made public and i certainly don't believe it contained 3 year old intelligence.

No offense, but you appear to be working off three year old intelligence yourself. The memo has been released. You can doubt it all you want, but I have read it.

Here's a link to it (http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/80601pdb.html).

It was declassified and approved for release on 10 April, 2004.

[gumboot]

For reference, the available FDR data indicates that the hijackers used the Autopilot to navigate, but entering the NAVAID nearest to their intended target. From reaching the NAVAID, it appears the aircraft were then piloted visually.

[Jackanory]

Did the terrorists use the on board instruments in the plane to navigate their way to the targets or some other way of navigation (I know nothing about flying)?

Probably used a mixture of technical help from numerous onboard systems as well as visual landmarks. They could also have used the airline pilots up to some point on the pretence that they where holding bombs rather than about to use the aircraft as a missile. I would imagine from the FDR and flight path information available that the final approaches made where certainly made by simply looking for lanmarks and two huge towers. Obviously this was made much easier for the second impact, given the amount of smoke billowing from the first.

Its easy to go and have a 1hr flight from your local aerodrome and take the controls for 15mins. Albeit in a 185 cessna -but it still highlights the ease at which visual navigation and aircraft control is. Take off and landing may be difficult (not required on 9/11) but actual flying is not so difficult. Kids can go do it in the USA and fly quite confidently after only 1hrs instruction. Twoofers dont get out much so cant really comprehend these things and so make things appear far more difficult.

[Myriad]

Apparently, the desert cave-dwelling hijackers used to crash planes into womp-rats in Beggar's Canyon back home. And they're not much bigger than two meters.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[TruthersLie]

Apparently, the desert cave-dwelling hijackers used to crash planes into womp-rats in Beggar's Canyon back home. And they're not much bigger than two meters.

Respectfully,
Myriad

But that's impossible without the targeting computer.

and we know that was an inside jobby job
eaB-CRFPHxY

[I Ratant]

Although the black boxes were immolated, the Tourist Guy's friend's cheapie camera survived.

[cyclonic]

There's speculation that they eventually intended to fly to a Muslim-friendly country.

The French quite clearly intended to storm the plane right from the outset.

According to some of the hostages, the hijackers displayed increasing reluctance to kill as time went on.


Speculation?

why would the french prime minister storm the plane from the outset when
"Prior to 9/11 your odds of surviving an airline hijacking were actually pretty good"

the order was given while the plane was in transit to marsielle after recieving reliable intelligence about the hijackers.

reluctance to kill?
lets hear from the french prime minister and the hostages that survived to what happened on flight 8969
aircrash investigation:the killing machine.
part 1
8PCeRAW1b9w

part 2
PtgAUF3rSvE

part 3
_rGvZRMAsAI

part 4

hpzKx-44n3o

part 5

OTSyr7XfMiE

[cyclonic]

No offense, but you appear to be working off three year old intelligence yourself. The memo has been released. You can doubt it all you want, but I have read it.

Here's a link to it (http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/terrorism/80601pdb.html).

It was declassified and approved for release on 10 April, 2004.

OK, we will agree to disagree, you believe the CIA gives a US president intelligence 3 years old and i wont.

cheers

[jaydeehess]

Although the black boxes were immolated, the Tourist Guy's friend's cheapie camera survived.

I hope you just forgot to add the smilie.

[jaydeehess]

The Washington Monument is actually taller, but that just would help the terrorists find the Capitol. It's due East of that big pointy thing.

There is something else to mention. Simply by reading the newspapers, the terrorists would also have known that both houses of Congress were in session on 9/11. A much better target than the White House on a day the President was known to be out of town.

I had forgotten the name of that obelisk (which president was it named for.) Being a Canuck, its just not that important to me.

Yes, it would serve the same use as the sights on a long gun.

Truthers such as bill smith work backwards from a point of speculation, 'WTC 7 was rigged for demolition just like the towers', and deduce that flt 93 was the plane that was supposed to hit WTC 7.

I prefer to look at the facts concerning the three succesful attacks and compare the characteristics of those targets and then look about for other potential targets that fit this profile.

While WTC 7 certainly is large at 47 floors and it is somewhat distinctive with its rhomboid shape, it fails utterly at being a world renowned symbol of American power and is just another very tall building in a city with many very tall buildings and so not all that distinctive in its enviroment..

The Whitehouse is at the tip-top of the list of world renowned symbols of power but fails at being particularily easy to find from the air at a few hundred MPH.
The Capitol is second on the list of symbolic power and could only be easier to see from the air if they put a giant flashing neon sign on top of the dome that says, 'you want to be here'.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Apparently, the desert cave-dwelling hijackers used to crash planes into womp-rats in Beggar's Canyon back home. And they're not much bigger than two meters.

Respectfully,
Myriad

I just love those kinds of punch lines! ;)

Thanks Myriad! :D

[Mancman]

Regarding navigation, I was just using the free Flightgear Simulator (http://www.flightgear.org/), flew east from Boston until I hit the Hudson, followed it south, and was over Manhattan in no time at all. Remarkably easy, first attempt. And the hijackers surely practised like this hundreds of times.

[BigAl]

Regarding navigation, I was just using the free Flightgear Simulator (http://www.flightgear.org/), flew east from Boston until I hit the Hudson, followed it south, and was over Manhattan in no time at all. Remarkably easy, first attempt. And the hijackers surely practised like this hundreds of times.

And I believe it's not for nothing that the picked September for it's predictably clear weather and Tuesday the 11th was as clear in the East as it gets.

[I Ratant]

There was an add-on for Microsoft Flight Simulator for awhile.

[ImANiceGuy]

What does "LIHOP" theory, whatever that is say about the literal tons of evidence and thousands of eyewitnesses that support the 4 jets causing all the death and destruction on 9/11 and the fat evidence trail that shows that 19 Islamist Arabs hijacked those planes?

You need help with comma placement.

[gumboot]

Speculation?

why would the french prime minister storm the plane from the outset when
"Prior to 9/11 your odds of surviving an airline hijacking were actually pretty good"


You'd have to ask the French Prime Minister that. The French wanted to storm the aircraft immediately, but the Algerian government wouldn't let them into the country. Then the French encouraged the Algerian government to let the plane take off, so it would come into French territory, where the French could resolve it. On the night of December 24th France deployed its GIGN to Majorca, Spain - as close as they could get without looking to be interfering - on an identical airline, allowing the operatives to familiarise themselves with the aircraft in preparation for an assault. All of this happened before there were any rumours of a suicide attack.


the order was given while the plane was in transit to marsielle after recieving reliable intelligence about the hijackers.

The French Government didn't realistically consider the firebomb plot until after the flight had landed on the 26th, when the hijackers asked for a full fuel load. It was another couple of hours after that, that the French Government first heard of the supposed firebomb plot. They had already made a decision to storm the aircraft on the 24th.



lets hear from the french prime minister and the hostages that survived to what happened on flight 8969

The hijackers let 63 passengers leave, and would have let more go, but many of the Algerian passengers refused to get off the plane. In the very programme you provided (The Killing Machine) the survivors talk of Yahia's reluctance to kill a fourth hostage, and his continued delaying of the execution - instead choosing to fire randomly outside the aircraft and at the control tower.

[gumboot]

OK, we will agree to disagree, you believe the CIA gives a US president intelligence 3 years old and i wont.

cheers


I think they give the President intelligence as up to date as they can. They had nothing new on Bin Laden's intentions, so they were just updating. Basically what the memo is actually saying is:

"Three years ago Bin Laden made it clear he intended to attack inside the USA, and we have no reason to think anything has changed in that regard, so we're still keeping a close eye on Al Qaeda activity".

If you think there's anything new and important in that memo point it out.

[cyclonic]

You'd have to ask the French Prime Minister that. The French wanted to storm the aircraft immediately, but the Algerian government wouldn't let them into the country. Then the French encouraged the Algerian government to let the plane take off, so it would come into French territory, where the French could resolve it. On the night of December 24th France deployed its GIGN to Majorca, Spain - as close as they could get without looking to be interfering - on an identical airline, allowing the operatives to familiarise themselves with the aircraft in preparation for an assault. All of this happened before there were any rumours of a suicide attack.




The French Government didn't realistically consider the firebomb plot until after the flight had landed on the 26th, when the hijackers asked for a full fuel load. It was another couple of hours after that, that the French Government first heard of the supposed firebomb plot. They had already made a decision to storm the aircraft on the 24th.




The hijackers let 63 passengers leave, and would have let more go, but many of the Algerian passengers refused to get off the plane. In the very programme you provided (The Killing Machine) the survivors talk of Yahia's reluctance to kill a fourth hostage, and his continued delaying of the execution - instead choosing to fire randomly outside the aircraft and at the control tower.



fRENCH INTERIOR MINISTER "while the plane was flying toward france, we recieved other information that according to which the terrorists planned to use the plane to carry out an attack on paris, the information was credible and we took it seriously, so the decision was made no matter what, the plane would not take-off from marsielle, no matter how high the price may be, the plane will not take-off"

Before they made this decision it was an option.

"instead choosing to fire randomly outside the aircraft and at the control tower"


Lucky they didn't blow up another plane or kill anyone in the control tower.

[cyclonic]

I think they give the President intelligence as up to date as they can. They had nothing new on Bin Laden's intentions, so they were just updating. Basically what the memo is actually saying is:

"Three years ago Bin Laden made it clear he intended to attack inside the USA, and we have no reason to think anything has changed in that regard, so we're still keeping a close eye on Al Qaeda activity".

If you think there's anything new and important in that memo point it out.

I personally don't believe that information between the CIA and the president is made public.
why show the enemy how your intelligence works?

[Bluesky]

Well working back from the Controlled Demolition theory I think that the ae911truth theory has to go something like this:

Planning probably need a min of a year to plan and impliment.
Al Queda directly or indirectly contact Bush and Cheney just after they win election to coordinate attack.
US priority is to develop new thermite weapon that melts thicK steel by pouring super-hot liquid onto it.
Develop explosives that can withstand extreme temperatures and that neither flash or make a noise when they explode.
Let elevator maintenance contract ..planning goes back more than a year..so perhaps Clinton was also involved.
Start detail demo analysis... to ensure that North Tower will fall on WTC 7 since this is the opposite direction from which the tower will be hit.
Also need to start coordination to make sure main explosives are located at plane impact levels

Access. Predemolition and weakening work
Get access to about 30% of the core columns thro the elevator maintenance....
Access to other core columns and the facade columns by crawling through false ceiling and not putting your foot thro the acoustic ceiling (according to Gage)
Remove fire protection and burn holes in columns, and weld on charges, without setting of fire alarms, without creating any dust and without disturbing people working late and without damaging acoustic ceiling. (several hundred tons of explosive according to gage)

Implimentation
Coordinate safe passage thro security for the plane team and crash planes into towers at level where main explosives are located.
Wait until most people escape and then without warning demolish the South Tower which was the second tower to be hit, using silent, flashless nanothermite explosives at the impact level.
Wait until more people escape from the North tower then without warning demolish the second tower using the same method, making sure that debris falls onto WTC7.
Make sure that NYFD does not fight WTC& fire all day, because the demo team does not want to go home early.
Phone Larry Silverstein, the BBC and a large group of firemen to warn them that you are still going to demolish WTC7.. ( ooops was that their mistake or their plan, its difficult to imagine either. )
Demolish WTC7 .

Cover-up and aftermath
So no one owns up to any involvement in the planning and preparation, and no one that was in the building reports any suspicious activity going on associated with 9/11. The cover up on site was more difficult and the cover-up team would need to bribe the thousands of engineers, contractors, police, firemen, and CIA who worked at the WTC site on the recovery and cleanup to make sure that nobody noticed or reported anything unusual.
Perhaps they vetted all the workers to ensure that only conspiracy minded people worked on the search and recovery. The demo team continued to "explode" thermite in the pile, for weeks after the initial explosion, as the "red-hot steel is proof of thermite". But they made sure this thermite never actually cut steel in anything but expected locations.

Each step of this is stupid and ridiculous, but is a direct requirement of controlled demolition. This helps to explain why the ae911truth always prefer to make vague accusations and do not try and put together their mad theory.

[I Ratant]

Well working back from the Controlled Demolition theory I think that the ae911truth theory has to go something like this:

Planning ...

Access....

Implementation ...

Cover-up and aftermath ...

.
It's so simple when all the necessary steps are laid out. :)

[jaydeehess]

I appreciate your thorough and civil response. For the sake of this discussion, and really nothing else, I would suggest that LIHOP is a theory which competes with the official story, and deserves equal investigative treatment.

What does "LIHOP" theory, whatever that is say about the literal tons of evidence and thousands of eyewitnesses that support the 4 jets causing all the death and destruction on 9/11 and the fat evidence trail that shows that 19 Islamist Arabs hijacked those planes?
RI, as usual, is wrong.

Of course a LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose) senario simply includes the already accepted so-called official story.
It can hardly be said to 'compete' with the idea that 19 Islamic Fundementalist Juhadists hijacked 4 aircraft and used them as suicide weapons BECAUSE that is exactly what athe LIHOP senario calls for.

The sole and only difference would be one of ommission as far as the commonly accepted history of 9/11. That is to say that some element of the gov't machinery of the USA knew full well what was about to occur and did nothing to stop it.

[1stClassAlan]

Crash a fuel laden heavy jet into any occupied UK office building in a way that destroys the pipes for the sprinkler system and the fire would also spread quickly.

Hi Kestrel,

I'm sorry if you took my comment to be knocking the good old U.S. of A. - I am actually quite a Yankeephile ( and if you need further assurance of this fact - prefer American Football far more than Soccer! )

I of course agree with you concerning the damage of aircraft collision followed by incendary jet fuel firing large areas of both buildings in conflagrations completely unimagined by any building code - but........ the fires spread upwards to unaffected floors very quickly and I think that this can be laid firmly at the door of "light" construction - 4" thick floor pans will not hold an intense fire let alone when pierced by numerous ducts and cableways, staircases and elevator shafts. I understand that both WTC towers were built without sprinklers and that these were being retrofitted floor by floor in an upgrading that stared after the 1993 bombing and was still not completed by 911. I also understand that the old style construction such as evident in the Empire State building has far more compartmentalisation floor to floor and double insulating concrete and mortared brickwork to all steelwork - allowing it to survive the B25 strike in much better shape.

Many of the thirty year old buildings that I've inspected in this country fail even the most basic fire tests - they have been subject to unlicensed alterations ( pipes and cables pushed through cut-outs in fire protection ) tenants exceeding the safe storeage rate for combustibles etc. Floor slabs that abut steelwork ( similar to WTC spandrels ) often have a gap greater than ones fingers and are rarely checked.

However, as floor slabs of most highrise were limited to traditional poured reinforced concrete in my time - they stood fire far better and I say this after experience in refitting two buildings in which at least one floor was "cooked" by having fire on top aswel as underneath. I understand that many of our newer buildings such as Canary Wharf Tower are of lightweight steel construction similar to U.S. developments - they all look fine and futuristic - until they catch fire!

[Without Rights]

They mostly just did.


Perhaps you meant to say, "resident deniers".

If the standard is that you only focus skepticism on all things non-government then I guess I'm not a skeptic. Focusing skepticism toward government in anyway gets you grouped in with others whether you agree with them or not by labeling "truther" and "denier". Then the attack dogs with nothing to say come barking insults.

At the same time, people who say they trust government can make the most ridiculous claims and it is ignored. Never question the herd. That should be a JREF slogan.

There are a few people I've come across that actually argue intelligible, I'm sure there are plenty in areas of JREF that I haven't come across also, so pardon the blanket statement.

[carlitos]

If the standard is that you only focus skepticism on all things non-government then I guess I'm not a skeptic. Focusing skepticism toward government in anyway gets you grouped in with others whether you agree with them or not by labeling "truther" and "denier". Then the attack dogs with nothing to say come barking insults.

At the same time, people who say they trust government can make the most ridiculous claims and it is ignored. Never question the herd. That should be a JREF slogan.

Hi there, Without Rights! You seem to have missed the original post in this thread, so here is the important part. I'd love to hear your thoughts. :)

Here is a thread where those who believe alternative explanations can post their best theory. Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed.

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

[aggle-rithm]

You need help with comma placement.

I see...you can't answer the question, so you've decided to wow us with your editing skills.

Very nice.

[carlitos]

This could almost be a stundie:

There are a few people I've come across that actually argue intelligible

[carlitos]

:bump2

I have been linking this in a few responses to the remaining truthers, but no avail. So, I just thought I might bump it to the top. Maybe the part in CAPS is scaring them away, I don't know.


Here is a thread where those who believe alternative explanations can post their best theory. Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed.

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

[TruthersLie]

again and again.

MOTHRA did it as a pretext to get godzilla to demolish tokyo. He was lured (under false pretenses I might add) to the wtc towers because they looked like a good place to hang out and his weight pulled them over. It wasn't really his fault.

[aggle-rithm]

again and again.

MOTHRA did it as a pretext to get godzilla to demolish tokyo. He was lured (under false pretenses I might add) to the wtc towers because they looked like a good place to hang out and his weight pulled them over. It wasn't really his fault.

Right. The witnesses had never seen a giant moth before, but they had seen many airliners, so they simply misinterpreted what they saw.

We may never know why Mothra found it necessary to paint "United Airlines" on the side of his body; he's not talking.

And THAT is why we need a new investigation, with subpeona power for all monsters involved in the tragedy.

[carlitos]

I added some tags. Maybe this will help.

[Alferd_Packer]

again and again.

MOTHRA did it as a pretext to get godzilla to demolish tokyo. He was lured (under false pretenses I might add) to the wtc towers because they looked like a good place to hang out and his weight pulled them over. It wasn't really his fault.

What about those two tiny singing girls? Where were they, HMMMMM?

[Sam.I.Am]

What about those two tiny singing girls? Where were they, HMMMMM?

In WTC 7 lighting fires with little tiny tiki torches...

[aggle-rithm]

What about those two tiny singing girls? Where were they, HMMMMM?

They are merely the side effect of too much LSD and sake.

[carlitos]

Mackey is right. Close the forum and just keep one thread going.

[Sunray Breaker]

Isn't it obvious?

The "so-called" 9/11 "attacks" were staged in the same underground film studio in the REAL hollywood that the illjoominati reptilian overlords used to stage the moon landing and the holohoax. They used advanced computer technology combined with telekinetic vibrations from the fourth reich dimension, to simultaneously broadcast this "tragedy" all over the world. All the so called "victims" that you see are actors that were blackmailed with gay pornagraphic images that we're taken of them at the Bohemian Grove compound.

The planes were merely those that were left over from the film True Lies. Arnold Swarzeneggar knows this, but has kept quiet because his wife is a kennedy (and we know what illjoominati does to kennedy's)

Alex Jones was then hired by CIA for project Mockingbird, to use the tragedy to steer the american people into a pseudo revolutinary frenzy so they would grab their guns and start attacking federal officers. At this point the REX84 and operation cable splice goes into effect and FEMA starts rounding up the American citzens and putting them in labor camps and using mind controlling vaccines to lobotomize their circadiun ryhthm thus frocing them into hard slave labor, melting down all the gold that the joos have been stealing for the last 25 billion quantum centuries, so that they can use the melted gold to fuel planet x as a giant sumerian death star, which will be used to steer it directy towards earth and destroy all but 1% of humanity. At which point Satan will torture everyone whose left for no reason, for the rest of eternity. The Mayans, the Bible and David Icke all predicted that this will happen in the next five minutes, 2012 and at the dawning of the golden age.

Don't believe me? Look it up for yourself!!!

:P

[Profanz]

I agree with the findings of the 9/11 Commission, and the additional information I have read like Lawrence Wright's excellent The Looming Tower. Al Qaeda planned, financed and conducted a terrorist attack on the United States on September 11, 2001, by simultaneously hijacking 4 aircraft and crashing them into 3 out of 4 of their targets. The 4th jet was crashed to the ground once the passengers figured out what was going on. The World Trade Center 1 & 2 suffered structural damage due to plane impact and fires and collapsed. WTC 7 suffered damage from being struck by WTC debris and fire and collapsed.

Here is a thread where those who believe alternative explanations can post their best theory. Post your theory as to who / what / when / how the attacks of 11-September, 2001 were planned, financed and executed.

PLEASE DO NOT JUST 'ASK QUESTIONS' IN THIS THREAD. Post your theory, or the alternative theory that you find most credible.

Why do I need a theory? I mean you did ask me to come here. If you know for a fact what happened on 9/11 then prove it. Truthers are the skeptics of your conspiracy theory.