Muslim researcher explains how 9/11 was made

[Sam.I.Am]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mehmetin

In fact, the only technology which could be used to make those planes hit so precisely their targets is “tomahawk missile system” installed inside the plane and made able to control the planes.

I got this far and I face palmed so hard that I almost gave myself a concussion.

Mehmetin, without going to far into the details let me tell you that the main component of the guidance system in a modern Tomahawk is already installed in commercial aircraft, automobiles, private watercraft and is even available in hand held units sold over the counter at your local Radio Shack and has been since before 9/11. It's called GPS (Global Positioning System). Before that, back in the 1970's, when there was no GPS, the original missile design used a RADAR system called TerCon Mapping (Terrain Contour) that used highly accurate (and classified at the time) maps stored in its memory system and used the downwards reading TerCon RADAR to read and compare the ground below to see if they matched the maps in memory. It was nowhere near as accurate as GPS but was more accurate than just using gyros alone.

In other words you not only have no idea what you're talking about but even some very light research on the subject would've prevented yourself from embarrassing yourself by showing that your ignorance on some very basic core components of your own theories are nowhere near as nefarious as you would like to make them out to be.

[Zep]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Originally Posted by Zep

Mehmet, let me just ask: Are you prepared to change your mind at all if any of your evidence is fully debunked?

With no doubt I am ready to change my opinion if all my evidence are debunked.

Well so far, all the evidence you have produced has been debunked. So you had better be prepared to change your mind. Unless you have more we haven't seen yet that is somewhat better quality?

Quote:

All other your arguments are not technical, you just make speculation on my work, so I did not answer.

No, I commented on your so-called evidence you pointed me to. There's nothing to debunk - all of it is from your own imagination, not from fact. I suspect you won't answer because you can't answer. So you are ignoring the gaping holes appearing around you.

Quote:

Let's be short and precise and scientific and logical.

We have been. Perhaps you should start doing this yourself. I did point out you needed to do this right at the start, didn't I.


Incidentally, many prominent Muslims around the world in the years since 9-11 have roundly condemned the actions of the 9-11 hijackers and their masters as being completely against the teachings of Islam. We were told they made significant errors in their religious reasoning. Not being Muslim myself, I can't refute that.

But I have read the Koran (it's a very thoughtful book), and I don't recall reading anywhere about advocating bloody suicide missions in aircraft and killing innocents in the process. So I think you will find many here who do not condemn Islam or Muslims particularly because of 9-11.

Perhaps your anger is completely misplaced? Have you considered that the reality is the perpetrators of 9-11 were just lawless renegades who thought they were Muslim but were very badly misled by others who used them for their own evil purposes?

[Dave Rogers]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

You are right, that’s a key point, but it’s consistent with one team made operation.

The burden of proof is still on you to demonstrate that it's inconsistent with the type of operation indicated by all the evidence, i.e. a hijack/manned missile attack. It's completely irrelevant that you claim it's consistent with other types of operation.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

In fact, the only technology which could be used to make those planes hit so precisely their targets is “tomahawk missile system” installed inside the plane and made able to control the planes.

Not true; a manual control system operated by a barely competent pilot is easily capable of hitting all three targets that were actually hit with the accuracy that they were hit. This includes, of course, the factor that the pilots were sufficiently incompetent that they nearly missed WTC2 and nearly hit the lawn before hitting the Pentagon. Nothing about the second and third attacks implies precision.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

That implies the missile (the plane) is able to find its target without human intervention. Due to the nature of the system, that operation of “finding its target” should be made without human intervention. That means the team work finishes some minutes before the impact. That’s what we see in all cases.

Agan, Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, with a side order of Affirming the Consequent.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

You may be right if they were able to foresee the delay times of the planes, then they can make plans and decide to make such successive hijacks (even if there is no reason for them to make the hijacks successive). But they are unable to foresee the delays of each plane.

And especially about the last plane, there is a huge problem: It was delayed by 41 minutes. As they were delayed, the team inside that plane should think they are delayed out of the plans and they should hijack the plane as soon as possible. Let’s say within 15 minutes, like the first plane. But they waited 53 minutes before takeover the plane, the longest time. And by coincidence, that happened at 9:35; 3 minutes before the impact of the Pentagon at 9:38.

Bare assertion fallacy, and appeal to your own authority. You actually know nothing about how the hijackers determined when to take over the planes, and nor does anybody else. Your opinion is that they should have hijacked flight 93 as soon as possible, but that's just your opinion; to give it any weight whatsoever would be cultural stereotyping.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

That’s we agree. Even if using statistical data we can give some characteristics to the evil doing in each community, but that does not mean other type of evil actions are impossible in specific community.

The evidence is clear that 19 angry young men from Moslem communities carried out the 9/11 attacks. They're not you, and their interpretation of Islam is not yours. You don't need to defend them.

ETA: Having read the thread further, I see that you consider Jewishness to be evidence of wrongdoing, and you appear to define a Jew as anyone who disagrees with you. In the light of that, please disregard anything in the above that appears suggestive of symathy or respect for your point of view.

Dave

[Oystein]

mehmetin,

what is your material evidence that Pete Zalewski is a Jew?
What is your material evidence that Zdenek Bazant is a Jew?

What is your material evidence for any wrongdoing by Mr. Zalewski?
Whar are your logical arguments to refute Mr. Bazant, who is one of the world-leading professors of Structural Engineering?


I assume that you hold yourself to the same standards that you want to hold us to, namely that you only accept material evidence and logic as arguments to support your claims.
I expect that you remove from your presentation every claim that you have no material evidence or compelling logic for.
I also expect that you retract your claims about Zalewski and Bazant, if you can't provide material evidence or compelling logic for them.

[Carll68]

Give this man a break..he has come here well prepared with an abundance of iron clad evidence the likes of which we have never seen before. Cut him some slack and listen to his exceptional and factual observations.







HaHa..Only kidding.


But, here is a direct question for a Muslim researcher: In the big picture, What do you propose would change had the pilots not been killed in grotesque cowardly fashion by muslim extremeists, and entered the hijack code? I mean, this is one of your cornerstones for your 'dem nastys joos' being in on it argument, so, surely you have thought this through.

[Sunstealer]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Not true; a manual control system operated by a barely competent pilot is easily capable of hitting all three targets that were actually hit with the accuracy that they were hit.

Makes me wonder how pilots manage to land aircraft on a narrow strip of tarmac. I think it must be impossible without a tomahawk guidance system. Has our brave truther uncovered the second greatest scam in history after Homer Simpson discovered that all truck drivers don't actually drive any more because their rigs all have a little box with a flashing red light that guides and drives the truck?

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Jackanory

Even if that were true, it wasn't a 'cruise missile' that was acting like that. It was a commercial airliner being flown by crazy scumbags who didn’t care how there flying looked to those watching on tv/youtube.

This is humour! There were no crazy scumbags. There was an on board automated system adapted from a Tomahawk control system.

Originally Posted by Jackanory

To humour your assertion that these aircraft where installed with "tomahawk systems", please advise how that "installed system" can "act exactly like that" whilst installed in a larger, heavier, wider, longer body?

That’s right; they had to setup the proportional/integral gain parameters. The mass and dimensions of the plane are too much different from small tomahawk missile ones. I let you guess when they made that setup? Your abilities look enough good to discover that yourself.

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by JohnG

mehmetin:

I put it to you that you began with the assumption that Muslims were not responsible for the 9/11 attacks and then worked your way backwards to attempt to spin the evidence in favor of your belief. I posit that your motivation for said actions were one or more of the following:

1. The very idea that fellow Muslims could be responsible for such a vicious, calculated crime is so unimaginably shameful to you that it is more that your psyche can bear, therefore you simply dismiss the idea outright.

2. Your fear that a group of Muslims being branded as being responsible for the most infamous act of terrorism in history will put the religion of Islam and its adherents in a bad light and that said adherents will become the victims of abuse and scorn by the rest of the world. Modern history has shown that such fears aren't entirely unfounded, but that is no excuse for denying a harsh, unpleasant truth.

3. Your hatred and mistrust for the ethnoreligious group known as the Jewish people which you already felt well before 9/11/2001.

4. Your hatred and mistrust for the US Government, partly because their support for Israel.

Debunk that

Fully wrong. I waited more than one year USA bring the evidence. I was always doubtful, but some times I was near to believe the official story. On end of 2002I heard about Meyssan analysed his arguments, find at least ONE true argument I began the investigation. Quickly I gathered time data and drawn the time graphic proving ONE team made the events. Then I had to discover all other evidences and explain all behavior of the planes, the towers, Pentagon, ...

At first I believed Bush administration did the strikes, up to mid 2007. At that time I came to the theory of Bazant. That began the involvement of Israelis. But quickly many Jews appeared to be complicit with the perpetrators.

Thanks to keep all hatred for yoruself. I am a human, equal to all humans on teh Earth.

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Oystein

This is FALSE.

By the time the airlines published list of victims (and contacted their relatives), the hijackers were already identified, it's just that not all 19 identifications were certain at the time for the purpose of convicting someone in court.

It is not up to you to declare FALSE claims in your presentation "meaningless". Obviously, every FALSE claim you make lowers your credibility.

However, could you explain why meaningless small details are included in your presentation? Would that not make it a bad presentation, even if it weren't FALSE?

The first part of my power point file named "anomalies" is just suspicious questions about the official stroy. I do not use these arguments to prove my claims. These are not important for me, they can be true or wrong, it's meaningless to discuss about them. They only shows that the evidence supporting the official story are too weak.

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

This is humour! There were no crazy scumbags. There was an on board automated system adapted from a Tomahawk control system.

Please dazzle us with your material evidence of this. Humor indeed.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

That’s right; they had to setup the proportional/integral gain parameters. The mass and dimensions of the plane are too much different from small tomahawk missile ones. I let you guess when they made that setup? Your abilities look enough good to discover that yourself.

Again, please entertain us with your material evidence. Don't ask us to visit your website for evidence. Post it here.

Edited by kmortis:

Removed incivility

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Fully wrong. I waited more than one year USA bring the evidence. I was always doubtful, but some times I was near to believe the official story. On end of 2002I heard about Meyssan analysed his arguments, find at least ONE true argument I began the investigation. Quickly I gathered time data and drawn the time graphic proving ONE team made the events. Then I had to discover all other evidences and explain all behavior of the planes, the towers, Pentagon, ...

You mean the data that has proved that more than one team carried out the attack? You know, the data which we've been discussing in this thread?

Originally Posted by mehmetin

At first I believed Bush administration did the strikes, up to mid 2007. At that time I came to the theory of Bazant. That began the involvement of Israelis. But quickly many Jews appeared to be complicit with the perpetrators.

Please provide material evidence of Jewish involvement in the 9/11 attacks. No pussy-footing please. Dazzle us with your bigoted brilliance.

Edited by kmortis:

Removed personal attack

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The first part of my power point file named "anomalies" is just suspicious questions about the official stroy. I do not use these arguments to prove my claims. These are not important for me, they can be true or wrong, it's meaningless to discuss about them. They only shows that the evidence supporting the official story are too weak.

1. They are false no matter how insignificant, and thus they destroy whatever little credibility you retained.

2. If they aren't important, why do you keep unimportant false claims on your website?

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Oystein

mehmetin,

on page 1 of this thread, I made 5 posts that addressed your opening post and your presentation in great detail, asking you specific questions and giving you specific evidence that proves every claim you made on the referred pages is FALSE. I am talking about posts numbers...
19
22
24
25
29

I then made 1 post (#32) that I started with "I am running out of time now", so there I did not provide the facts and the links to prove you wrong.

Predictably, you only replied to #32, and ignored all the questions and evidence in 19, 22, 24, 25 and 29.

Please be so kind and reply to these also. And please do so sincerely.
Thanks.

I won’t repeat all arguments to everybody.

Post 19:
- Whay the succession of the hijacks is impossible was explained. If you read my ppt file you’ll understand too.
- Why material was planted in the B737 that hit the Pentagon is explained too.
- The DNA identification of AA77 passengers did not show any terrorist (this is also explained).
- The presence of radio explosives and their placement is explained in my ppt file slides 44 - 54.1.
- Bush and Mossad’s involvement is explained in section “Disinformation and Perpetrators” of my web site.

Posts 22 & 24:
The anomalies section of my web site is just for information. It’s not the main claim. Useless to discuss it before understanding how the events were made.

Post 25:
These are my claims that I explain in the following slides. The evidences are given there. Why should I repeat them? No reason.

Post 29: Here you have some arguments, but you have no logics. You are just making non supported claims. You should think a little bit more. Any way here is your post:

Originally Posted by Oystein

7.1 End of 2002...

Your claim: "this high temperature explosion (color) proves the presence of a bomb"
Fact: The parking lot camera was not adjusted for the brightness of fires of any kind. The fire ball is simply overexposed, rendering any color just plain white
Material evidence: Any overexposed photograph of bright colors (I could attach sample photos from my own camera if you don't understand what I mean)

I considered such over exposition, but nothing can explain such brightness difference.

Originally Posted by Oystein

8-How could the US government make the strikes?

Your claim: (You don't actually make any, just imagination)
Fact: (No need to counter pure imagination with facts.
Material evidence: (You provide none)

In the following slides you’ll find the evidence. I’ll not give all evidence inside one single slide!

Originally Posted by Oystein

9-One team / 4 teams
Fact: Your column for "4 teams" accurately describes what actually happened: 4 teams acted independently of each other once their plane tickets were booked. They didn't contact each other during the flights. That's why the flights and hijacks overlapped each other and took different times.
Material evidence: You provide it yourself in the following pages, in particular page 13.

These aspects were explained. The small overlap is just the time duration when one plane was flying near its target in autonomous operation, the team can begin to control the next one. That happened in all planes. (This is a repeat in that thread.)

Originally Posted by Oystein

13-Timeline graphic and conclusions

Your claim: "All hijacks were made sequentially, one plane at a time!"
Fact: This is to be expected. However, for some minutes at a time, flights 11 and 175 were hijacked simultaneously. The same is true for 175 and 77, and for 77 and 93. So actually two planes at a time were hijacked
Material evidence: Included in your own graph

Your claim: "Before deviating from its flight route, each plane waited for the previous plane to be put on target"
Fact: This is wrong in all 3 cases:
- Flight 175 deviated before 11 was put into target, it didn't wait
- Flight 77 deviated before 175 was put into target, it didn't wait
- Flight 93 deviated before 77 was put into target, it didn't wait
Material evidence: Included in your own graph on that page

Your claim: "The deviation of any plane was dependent on the situation of the previous plane"
Fact: Refuted by the falseness two previous claims
Material evidence: See above.

14-CONCLUSION

Your claim: "The timeline ... is fully consistent with a central control ... by ONE TEAM"
Fact: While it may be fully consistent with one team, it is also connsistent with 4 teams, and there exists neither material evidence nor any compelling logic why one team should be preferred. In fact, you have failed to even tell us how one team would have done the coordinating - what technology was used?
Material evidence: See page 13.

Your claim: "This timeline is impossible to make by four different teams"
Fact: Wrong. Each hijacking was done according to the same plan, differing only slightly in timing. There is no reason to speculate about any meaning of the timing between planes, except that all take-offs took place within less than an hour. All hijacks happened within 1:25 hours, the same is about true for all crashs. This is to be expected when all 4 teams acted according to the same general plan for hijacking a plane.
There exists no logic or material problem that would make the timeline "impossible".
Material evidence: None required.

Four different teams can not make such succession, each deviation beginning minutes before the precedent ends. That’s the conclusion of the slide 9.

[Carll68]

Tap
Tap
Tap

Anyone there? Is this thing on?

Tell me, since the pilots not entering the hijack code is the crux of, and imperative to, your delusion, er, argument....explain what you think would have changed if the pilots would have entered this code?

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Lenbrazil

The pilots who weren't killed before they could react obviously would have been trying to defend themselves. If you were a pilot and being attacked would your priority be 1) save your life OR 2) punch the hijack code on the transponder?

If you are a hijacker, what would you do? Immediately attack the pilots, cut their throats and put blood everywhere by risking some malfunction in some instruments? Or at first ask them to leave their seat? Sure, ask them to leave their seat. That happened in all hijacks. So your imagination is too much flawed?

Originally Posted by Lenbrazil

They might not have even remembered the code it had been many years since the last US plane was hijacked and stress adversely affects memory



Why is this suspicious? Obviously the hijacking would have started after one radio communication and before another. I don't think understands what your point it.

Except if the time gap between these two communications is only 16 seconds and that the pilots changed from “totally normal” operation to “totally silent” operation! That coincidence is suspicious. The reason to give these two orders at that moment is also not explained. Were there really any reason for these two successive orders? I am doubtful.

[Carll68]

..And, again, if they entered these codes...how would this have changed the events???????

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

If you are a hijacker, what would you do? Immediately attack the pilots, cut their throats and put blood everywhere by risking some malfunction in some instruments? Or at first ask them to leave their seat? Sure, ask them to leave their seat. That happened in all hijacks. So your imagination is too much flawed?

If I was a rabid fundamentalist Muslim hijacker, I would have attacked and overpowered the pilots as quickly as possible to prevent them from sending a distress call or possibly turn the situation around - you know, exactly like the rabid fundamentalist Muslim hijackers did on 9/11.

[240-185]

Oh dear.

Edited by kmortis:

Removed personal attack

[O]n a french-speaking canadiam skeptical forum, we had a discussion with him, and it appears that:

‒ He believes that there was hypnotic gas which was spread into the airplanes. Evidence? A James Bond movie. Because this technology was known.
‒ He believes that Dylan Avery & Co., Judy Wood and Zdenek Bazant have narrow links with Israel.
‒ He stills states that "muslims didn't do 9/11", which is the biggest strawman I've ever seen.
‒ He believes KSM is a jew.
‒ He states that the video when we see Mohamed Atta registering his flight was faked by Zionists.
‒ He states that all the confessional videos were faked by Zionists.
‒ He states that "Tim Donald Timmermann" is a jew because Timmermann is a common family name in Israel.
‒ And so on.

Originally Posted by Oystein

mehmetin,

what is your material evidence that Pete Zalewski is a Jew?
What is your material evidence that Zdenek Bazant is a Jew?

Because "Zalewski" sounds jewish for mehmetin.
Because "Zdenek" sounds jewish for mehmetin too.

He spots jews everywhere just by guessing. He was guessing so much he got banned from the forum I mentioned above. And he will deny to be antisemitic despite all that crap.

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Why are you seeing hatred everywhere?

I'm not. I am seeing hatred and bigotry coming from you.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

I am just making logical investigation and telling my conclusions.

No, you aren't. You are making up stuff based on no evidence. This is normally called lying.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

That's all.

No, that's not all. You are also accusing innocent people of committing mass murder and apologizing for the real culprits. This is morally reprehensible.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

I am based on material evidence, not on hatred.

No you aren't. You haven't provided a single iota of material evidence in this entire thread, so you can drop that lie right now because nobody's buying it.

[Carll68]

Originally Posted by uke2se

If I was a rabid fundamentalist Muslim hijacker, I would have attacked and overpowered the pilots as quickly as possible to prevent them from sending a distress call or possibly turn the situation around - you know, exactly like the rabid fundamentalist Muslim hijackers did on 9/11.

The events of the day would have been altered __________________________________once the distress code was entered because__________________________.?

Still waiting on him to fill in these easy blanks ....

Gee, if I had only dialed 9-1-1 after the man started shooting me, I might still be alive today.........

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The hijackings of all four aircraft on 9/11 were all carried out on the same day! This is clear evidence that the operation was controlled by MOSSAD from a central location by an agent with a calender!

My research has never been debunked.

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Not true; a manual control system operated by a barely competent pilot is easily capable of hitting all three targets that were actually hit with the accuracy that they were hit. This includes, of course, the factor that the pilots were sufficiently incompetent that they nearly missed WTC2 and nearly hit the lawn before hitting the Pentagon. Nothing about the second and third attacks implies precision.

You still have to prove the presence of 19 people who are willing to suicide themself in the planes. Nothing proves the presence of 19 terrorists.

I am speaking about automatic systems that can hit precise target. The only one which is reliable, known, proved and used by many people in USA is the "tomahawk control system". Every evidence is consistent with such control system.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Agan, Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy, with a side order of Affirming the Consequent.

Not possible by the unknown delays on take offs. It was impossible to predefine any takeover time for all planes before take off. So any synchronisation plan is impossible. The only possibility is ONE TEAM made operation.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

Bare assertion fallacy, and appeal to your own authority. You actually know nothing about how the hijackers determined when to take over the planes, and nor does anybody else. Your opinion is that they should have hijacked flight 93 as soon as possible, but that's just your opinion; to give it any weight whatsoever would be cultural stereotyping.

I just know how and why ONE TEAM will control the planes, and all evidence is consistent with it.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

The evidence is clear that 19 angry young men from Moslem communities carried out the 9/11 attacks. They're not you, and their interpretation of Islam is not yours. You don't need to defend them.

Your will, but that's not the truth. I do not defend any criminal, I am identifying the criminals, and they were Americans and Israelis.

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

ETA: Having read the thread further, I see that you consider Jewishness to be evidence of wrongdoing, and you appear to define a Jew as anyone who disagrees with you. In the light of that, please disregard anything in the above that appears suggestive of symathy or respect for your point of view.
Dave

The Jewishness is not evidence of wrong doing. But in case of Dr. Bazant, Tim Donald Timemrman and Pete Zalewski, their Jewishness is the only explanation why they may lied and/or participated to the events. Their jewishness is not a natural behavior, it's the need to help Israeli perpetrators who asked them help.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

You still have to prove the presence of 19 people who are willing to suicide themself in the planes. Nothing proves the presence of 19 terrorists. .

they bought tickets. they checked in for the flights. they sat down in their seats. what more do you want?

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The Jewishness is not evidence of wrong doing. But in case of Dr. Bazant, Tim Donald Timemrman and Pete Zalewski, their Jewishness is the only explanation why they may lied and/or participated to the events. Their jewishness is not a natural behavior, it's the need to help Israeli perpetrators who asked them help.

what evidence do you have that they are Jews?

what evidence do you have of any Israelis asking them to assist in hijackings?

and more importantly, why do you hate Jews soo much?

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

You still have to prove the presence of 19 people who are willing to suicide themself in the planes. Nothing proves the presence of 19 terrorists.

Except for all the evidence that does prove the presence of the 19 terrorists - DNA, documents, passenger manifests, video surveillance etc.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

I am speaking about automatic systems that can hit precise target. The only one which is reliable, known, proved and used by many people in USA is the "tomahawk control system". Every evidence is consistent with such control system.

No evidence is consistent with such a control system. No evidence even suggests such a control system. All evidence suggest manual control of the aircraft by fundamentalist Muslim terrorists.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Not possible by the unknown delays on take offs. It was impossible to predefine any takeover time for all planes before take off. So any synchronisation plan is impossible. The only possibility is ONE TEAM made operation.

False. All the evidence points to four teams - one team per plane - who took over the planes at various points in time but within a certain time limit. In fact, the UA 93 crash proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

I just know how and why ONE TEAM will control the planes, and all evidence is consistent with it.

False. No evidence is consistent with it.

Edited by kmortis:

Removed personal attack

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Your will, but that's not the truth.

It is the truth, proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

I do not defend any criminal,

Yes, you do. You defend the 19 criminal fundamentalist Muslim hijackers by denying that they perpetrated the acts.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

I am identifying the criminals, and they were Americans and Israelis.

False. You are accusing innocent people.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The Jewishness is not evidence of wrong doing. But in case of Dr. Bazant, Tim Donald Timemrman and Pete Zalewski, their Jewishness is the only explanation why they may lied and/or participated to the events.

False. You have not proven that any of these persons are Jewish, nor that they are wrong, even less that they lied. In fact, you have been caught in many lies in this thread, although it is possible to argue that your insanity is a reasonable cause of your lies.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Their jewishness is not a natural behavior,

Jewishness is a religious characteristic, not a behavior.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

it's the need to help Israeli perpetrators who asked them help.

False.

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Oystein

mehmetin,

what is your material evidence that Pete Zalewski is a Jew?
What is your material evidence that Zdenek Bazant is a Jew?

What is your material evidence for any wrongdoing by Mr. Zalewski?
Whar are your logical arguments to refute Mr. Bazant, who is one of the world-leading professors of Structural Engineering?

Zalewski and Bazant names are used by Jew people.

Zalewski gave two successive unexplained orders exactly at the time of deviation of AA11. In a one team operation, they needed to make these two successive orders to check the first operation of the first time used control system. And it worked well.

Bazant is one of the world-leading professors of Structural Engineering! And he undersigned one of the biggest wrong report ever heard and he made that within two days. That's suspicious. Why he is wrong?
1- The free fall operation is impossible by natural collapse. Even if we consider his improbable outer columns buckling, the inner core columns could never buckle. So they will always bore some weight and thus free fall operation is impossible.
2- The upper part does not fall in one part from top to bottom.
3- The lower columns are too much thicker than upper columns; the progressive collapse up to the ground is impossible.

Your Dr. Bazant, the world-leading professors of Structural Engineering, can not be unaware of that. Then he published that report by knowledge that he was publishing a wrong report. He lied deliberately.

Originally Posted by Oystein

I assume that you hold yourself to the same standards that you want to hold us to, namely that you only accept material evidence and logic as arguments to support your claims.
I expect that you remove from your presentation every claim that you have no material evidence or compelling logic for.
I also expect that you retract your claims about Zalewski and Bazant, if you can't provide material evidence or compelling logic for them.

Sorry, I just proved the evidence, so you should ask that a justice investigates the behavior of Zalewski and Bazant!

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Zalewski and Bazant names are used by Jew people.

Zalewski is a very popular Polish Catholic name.

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=...p&fr=slv8-tyc8

Bazant is a Czech name, common amoung non-Jews.

Edited by kmortis:

Removed personal attack

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Zalewski and Bazant names are used by Jew people.

This is not material evidence that either of the two are Jewish.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Zalewski gave two successive unexplained orders exactly at the time of deviation of AA11. In a one team operation, they needed to make these two successive orders to check the first operation of the first time used control system. And it worked well.

This is not material evidence that either of the two are Jewish.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Bazant is one of the world-leading professors of Structural Engineering! And he undersigned one of the biggest wrong report ever heard and he made that within two days. That's suspicious. Why he is wrong?

This is not material evidence that either of the two are Jewish.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

1- The free fall operation is impossible by natural collapse. Even if we consider his improbable outer columns buckling, the inner core columns could never buckle. So they will always bore some weight and thus free fall operation is impossible.

This is not material evidence that either of the two are Jewish. It is also false.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

2- The upper part does not fall in one part from top to bottom.

This is not material evidence that either of the two are Jewish. It is also false.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

3- The lower columns are too much thicker than upper columns; the progressive collapse up to the ground is impossible.

This is not material evidence that either of the two are Jewish. It is also false.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Your Dr. Bazant, the world-leading professors of Structural Engineering, can not be unaware of that. Then he published that report by knowledge that he was publishing a wrong report. He lied deliberately.

This is not material evidence that either of the two are Jewish. It is also false.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Sorry, I just proved the evidence, so you should ask that a justice investigates the behavior of Zalewski and Bazant!

You proved nothing.

Edited by kmortis:

Removed personal comments

[George152]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

If you are a hijacker, what would you do? Immediately attack the pilots, cut their throats and put blood everywhere by risking some malfunction in some instruments? Or at first ask them to leave their seat? Sure, ask them to leave their seat. That happened in all hijacks. So your imagination is too much flawed?

.

These mad muslims were intent on suicide.
They didn't hijack the aircraft for a nice little VFR cross country.
Instrument malfunctions were the least of their concerns..
You are really out there in Lala land

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Carll68

Tell me, since the pilots not entering the hijack code is the crux of, and imperative to, your delusion, er, argument....explain what you think would have changed if the pilots would have entered this code?

It's not imperative. It's an evidence that has been repeated in four planes and 8 pilots failed to do that. So that needs to be explained with realistic and true evidence. It's false to tell that the hijackers acted so quickly that none were able to key the code. The first thing that the hijackers should do is asking to the pilots to leave their seat. And that takes enough time for one of the pilots to enter the code.

Using that evidence and adding the following evidences, ....
- The first hijack happened within 16 seconds between two unexplained orders of Pete Zalewski. Only extremely quick dead could make that.
- We heard almost nothing about the pilots after takeover, not also by the false phone calls.
- It's impossible to make these hijacks using automatic control systems while the pilots are on board. The pilots should have been killed immediately.

... we should conclude that the pilots were gassed at the beginning of the hijacks. The passengers also have been gassed by the same gas injection into the plane. After that time, only on board automatic system was working on board.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

...
Four different teams can not make such succession, each deviation beginning minutes before the precedent ends. That’s the conclusion of the slide 9.

This is nonsense.

Quote:

At 7:59 Hijacker Mohamed Atta on Flight 11 calls hijacker Marwan Alshehhi in Flight 175 as both planes sit on the runway.

Oops, cell phones work on planes on the runway.

Quote:

The coordination between aircraft is clearly visible by the successive aspect of red areas representing the hijacked flights of the planes. Such coordination is a mandatory outcome when the planes are controlled by one team using the technology. There is no way or possibility it can be achieved by four different terrorist teams hijacking the aircraft. Especially as the last plane, which took off with an unexplained delay of 41 minutes, should ...

The aircraft took off at different times, this is NORMAL. The terrorist all had to wait for the plane to level off so they can kill the pilots and take a stable plane. Coordination for this is based on factors of flying, level off, take plane - navigate to the largest buildings in the USA. A job any kid could do save the murders, and crashing.

Unexplained 41 minute delay? This is normal, who has not been delayed for some small problem or maintenance problem, that person is lucky or does not fly often enough to experience lost luggage (many times my luggage is late, not on my plane, or delayed, and shows up by FedEx or special delivery) and delays, canceled flights, etc.

Oops, the unexplained delay is/was... for flight 93 ...

Quote:

The aircraft was scheduled to depart at 08:00 and pushed back from its gate A17 at 08:01. It remained delayed on the ground and did not take off until 08:42 because of airport congestion. The three

Your claims are not backed with facts and evidence and make zero sense. Your time line stuff does not support anything. What was your point? 19 terrorists did it, I can see their poor flying inputs in the FDR; the worse pilots I have seen, the only thing they can do is crash.


Looks like they planned on taking off close together, but 93 was delayed due to traffic. Nothing here, and no superior timing efforts, Flight 93 terrorists failed, they were late taking over the flight. It must be hard for UBL to get good pilots to do terrorists acts, he ended up with chicken murderers who failed when the Passengers on Flight 93 figured out 911 in minutes. Why has 911 truth failed given 9 years?

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

It's not imperative. It's an evidence that has been repeated in four planes and 8 pilots failed to do that. So that needs to be explained with realistic and true evidence.

You mean, as opposed to the kind of baseless assertions you attempt to pass as evidence?

Originally Posted by mehmetin

It's false to tell that the hijackers acted so quickly that none were able to key the code.

Oh, it's false is it? Prove it. Using evidence, not assertion.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The first thing that the hijackers should do is asking to the pilots to leave their seat.

Are you composing a rule-book for terrorists now? If I was a terrorist, asking is the last thing I'd do.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

And that takes enough time for one of the pilots to enter the code.

Maybe that's why the terrorists didn't ask? Dont you see how stupid your argument is? Of course you don't. Let me spell it out for you: "The terrorists would have done this and that because I just made it up that they would. This didn't happen, so there were no terrorists on the planes." This is retarded reasoning.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Using that evidence and adding the following evidences, ....
- The first hijack happened within 16 seconds between two unexplained orders of Pete Zalewski. Only extremely quick dead could make that.

What's so mysterious about these orders? Explain using evidence, not assertion.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

- We heard almost nothing about the pilots after takeover, not also by the false phone calls.

Let me educate you on how an aircraft is laid out. The pilots sit in the front, the passengers in the back. It is hard for the passengers to see the pilots. It is likely that the fundamentalist Muslim hijackers herded their victims into the rear of the plane to keep them under control. This would leave them completely unable to see what happened to the pilots. Thus, your so called "evidence" is in fact evidence of nothing.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

- It's impossible to make these hijacks using automatic control systems while the pilots are on board. The pilots should have been killed immediately.

The hijackings weren't executed using automatic control systems. The pilots were killed. You were saying?

Originally Posted by mehmetin

... we should conclude that the pilots were gassed at the beginning of the hijacks.

No we shouldn't. Research isn't done by making stuff up. That's all you've managed to do, so you have in fact done no research at all.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The passengers also have been gassed by the same gas injection into the plane.

No they haven't. You have no evidence of this. What was it you said about "only material evidence"? When are you going to provide some? Because thus far you have been pulling stuff out of your anus, and none of it is material evidence for anything other than bigotry, racism and severe paranoia.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Four different teams can not make such succession, each deviation beginning minutes before the precedent ends. That’s the conclusion of the slide 9.

Yes they can, they use a piece of technology called a "watch".

They were invented back in the 15th century. Ever heard of 'em?

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by beachnut

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l...11timeline.jpg

I like how this timeline shows absolutely nothing. no miraculous time coincidences are shown.

[Carll68]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

It's not imperative. It's an evidence that has been repeated in four planes and 8 pilots failed to do that. So that needs to be explained with realistic and true evidence. It's false to tell that the hijackers acted so quickly that none were able to key the code. The first thing that the hijackers should do is asking to the pilots to leave their seat. And that takes enough time for one of the pilots to enter the code.

Using that evidence and adding the following evidences, ....
- The first hijack happened within 16 seconds between two unexplained orders of Pete Zalewski. Only extremely quick dead could make that.
- We heard almost nothing about the pilots after takeover, not also by the false phone calls.
- It's impossible to make these hijacks using automatic control systems while the pilots are on board. The pilots should have been killed immediately.

... we should conclude that the pilots were gassed at the beginning of the hijacks. The passengers also have been gassed by the same gas injection into the plane. After that time, only on board automatic system was working on board.

You should try reading for comprehension.

Sooo....are you going to answer the question? Since the crux of your argument hinges upon no distress codes being entered...how do you feel the entering of these codes would have altered the days events?

IF ONLY I WOULD HAVE DIALED 9-1-1 AFTER THE GUNMAN STARTED SHOOTING ME, I MIGHT STILL BE ALIVE. <<< This is your logic chief.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

... we should conclude that the pilots were gassed at the beginning of the hijacks. The passengers also have been gassed by the same gas injection into the plane. After that time, only on board automatic system was working on board.

It's real nice to be able to claim fake to anything inconvenient.

Bye-Bye.

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by beachnut

The aircraft took off at different times, this is NORMAL. The terrorist all had to wait for the plane to level off so they can kill the pilots and take a stable plane. Coordination for this is based on factors of flying, level off, take plane - navigate to the largest buildings in the USA. A job any kid could do save the murders, and crashing.

Nothing explains time difference from 15 to 53 minutes while the reverse should happen if 4 different teams. I mean the first plane should deviate with delay while the last one should be deviated soon after take off. Exactly the reverse happened and with big difference. You can be silent, blind to that, but the facts are here. There is no reason to the first plane deviate after 15 minutes while the last one deviated after 53 minutes.

Originally Posted by beachnut

Unexplained 41 minute delay? This is normal, who has not been delayed for some small problem or maintenance problem, that person is lucky or does not fly often enough to experience lost luggage (many times my luggage is late, not on my plane, or delayed, and shows up by FedEx or special delivery) and delays, canceled flights, etc.

Oops, the unexplained delay is/was... for flight 93 ...

In Newark airport, on 9/11/2001, there was 14 take offs between 7:00 and 7:05. There was also 15 take offs between 8:10 and 8:41! (See bts.gov) There was no heavy traffic between 8:10 and 8:41. That means they delayed that plane to make its treatment by the control team possible by making it return into the planned Pittsburgh area.

Originally Posted by beachnut

Your claims are not backed with facts and evidence and make zero sense.

That’s your will, but not the reality.

Originally Posted by beachnut

Your time line stuff does not support anything. What was your point? 19 terrorists did it, I can see their poor flying inputs in the FDR; the worse pilots I have seen, the only thing they can do is crash.

The successive aspect or the red bars is clearly visible. You can not deny that. That successive aspect is impossible to be made by 4 different teams.

Originally Posted by beachnut

Looks like they planned on taking off close together, but 93 was delayed due to traffic. Nothing here, and no superior timing efforts, Flight 93 terrorists failed, they were late taking over the flight.

If there were 4 terrorists on that plane, they’d takeover the controls about 15 minutes after take off. In such case, they would not be late and they should have succeeded. But, as there were no terrorists, but the central control team was still busy on Pentagon strike, they waited 9:35 before take it over.

Originally Posted by beachnut

It must be hard for UBL to get good pilots to do terrorists acts, he ended up with chicken murderers who failed when the Passengers on Flight 93 figured out 911 in minutes.

UBL has no pilots. No Muslims who are ready to suicide themselves are able to make such strikes.

Originally Posted by beachnut

Why has 911 truth failed given 9 years?

911truth is led by disinfo agents. I am not more related to them.

[mehmetin]

Originally Posted by Carll68

You should try reading for comprehension.

Sooo....are you going to answer the question? Since the crux of your argument hinges upon no distress codes being entered...how do you feel the entering of these codes would have altered the days events?

IF ONLY I WOULD HAVE DIALED 9-1-1 AFTER THE GUNMAN STARTED SHOOTING ME, I MIGHT STILL BE ALIVE. <<< This is your logic chief.

It's not the crux of my argument! You should undersand my words. Ok, my english is not perfect, you may need to get some more effort to understand, but it's not impossible to understand and you can ask more precise questions.

I do not need to explain and consider what would happened!

The absence of entered "hijack key codes" is a fact that has been repeated in four planes and 8 pilots failed to do that. (Is that understood?)

If you understood that, you can agree that this should be explained with realistic and true reasons. Why none of the pilots failed to key the code?

It's false to tell "the hijackers acted so quickly that none were able to key the code".

The first thing that the hijackers should do is asking to the pilots to leave their seat. And that takes enough time for one of the pilots to enter the code.

Using that evidence and considering the following evidences, ....
- The first hijack happened within 16 seconds between two unexplained orders of Pete Zalewski. Only extremely quick dead could make that.
- We heard almost nothing about the pilots after takeover, not also by the false phone calls.
- It's impossible to make these hijacks using automatic control systems while the pilots are on board and live. The pilots should have been killed immediately.

... we should conclude that the pilots were gassed at the beginning of the hijacks. The passengers also have been gassed by the same gas injection into the plane. After that time, only on board automatic system was working on the plane. The remote team can control the flying plane without any obstacle.

[uke2se]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

It's not the crux of my argument! You should undersand my words. Ok, my english is not perfect, you may need to get some more effort to understand, but it's not impossible to understand and you can ask more precise questions.

It's not that people don't understand you. It's that people are too intelligent to be duped by the same crap that you have.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

I do not need to explain and consider what would happened!

Yes, you do because you have argued that it would have made a difference. If you want to claim that you haven't, you have simply been talking nonsense (as in, absolutely incoherent nonsense as opposed to the ordinary nonsense you spout).

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The absence of entered "hijack key codes" is a fact that has been repeated in four planes and 8 pilots failed to do that. (Is that understood?)

Yes. The fact that this has been understood has been clearly communicated to you. Is that understood?

Originally Posted by mehmetin

If you understood that, you can agree that this should be explained with realistic and true reasons. Why none of the pilots failed to key the code?

And it has been.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

It's false to tell "the hijackers acted so quickly that none were able to key the code".

No, it isn't false. It is false for you to say that it is false.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The first thing that the hijackers should do is asking to the pilots to leave their seat. And that takes enough time for one of the pilots to enter the code.

No that is not the first thing that hijackers should do. Apparently the hijackers - while vile and reprehensible - were more intelligent than you.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

Using that evidence and considering the following evidences, ....

That wasn't evidence.

Since your points below is simply a repost of a post I already responded to, i will copy and paste my responses.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

- The first hijack happened within 16 seconds between two unexplained orders of Pete Zalewski. Only extremely quick dead could make that.

What's so mysterious about these orders? Explain using evidence, not assertion.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

- We heard almost nothing about the pilots after takeover, not also by the false phone calls.

Let me educate you on how an aircraft is laid out. The pilots sit in the front, the passengers in the back. It is hard for the passengers to see the pilots. It is likely that the fundamentalist Muslim hijackers herded their victims into the rear of the plane to keep them under control. This would leave them completely unable to see what happened to the pilots. Thus, your so called "evidence" is in fact evidence of nothing.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

- It's impossible to make these hijacks using automatic control systems while the pilots are on board and live. The pilots should have been killed immediately.

The hijackings weren't executed using automatic control systems. The pilots were killed. You were saying?

Originally Posted by mehmetin

... we should conclude that the pilots were gassed at the beginning of the hijacks.

No we shouldn't. Research isn't done by making stuff up. That's all you've managed to do, so you have in fact done no research at all.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The passengers also have been gassed by the same gas injection into the plane. After that time, only on board automatic system was working on the plane.

No they haven't. You have no evidence of this. What was it you said about "only material evidence"? When are you going to provide some? Because thus far you have been pulling stuff out of your anus, and none of it is material evidence for anything other than bigotry, racism and severe paranoia.

Originally Posted by mehmetin

The remote team can control the flying plane without any obstacle.

But there was no remote team, so that didn't happen.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by mehmetin

...
The absence of entered "hijack key codes" is a fact that has been repeated in four planes and 8 pilots failed to do that. (Is that understood?) ...

Pilots are sitting at the front of the plane, in a small space, facing forward, the control column is right at their hands and extends to the floor.

Terrorists run into the cockpit and cut the pilots throats, from behind. Not a lot of time to put in a code, let alone key the mic.

Do you have any clue how to set a hijack code? 8 pilots failed because they were dying. These murderers you apologize for killed 8 pilots and any passengers or crew who resisted them, they did not ask you to move, they killed you. They did not ask the pilots to get out, they killed them.

The only way the plot can succeed is to remove the pilots, the only people on board who can render the planes incapable of flight in seconds! They had to kill the pilots in seconds, or they might fail. The terrorists did not care if the pilots set the hijack codes. It makes no difference, the USA did not intercept automatically hijacked planes before 911!

It is too bad UBL had to rely on such bad pilots. Why is UBL unable to recruit real pilots for his suicide missions? These guys got FAA tickets, but they were not very good. I wonder if their families are proud of them? Why have their families not claimed their DNA/remains? Is it bad in Islam to murder by surprise, cut throats, kill women who beg to live? Got this on the CVR, the terrorist killing people; why did they do it? Why do you apologize for them and lie, blaming the Jews? Do you hate this much?

[Zep]

Originally Posted by 240-185

Oh dear.

This antisemitic scumbag is now invading JREF. Sorry for being harsh in my first post in this thread, but on a french-speaking canadiam skeptical forum, we had a discussion with him, and it appears that:

‒ He believes that there was hypnotic gas which was spread into the airplanes. Evidence? A James Bond movie. Because this technology was known.
‒ He believes that Dylan Avery & Co., Judy Wood and Zdenek Bazant have narrow links with Israel.
‒ He stills states that "muslims didn't do 9/11", which is the biggest strawman I've ever seen.
‒ He believes KSM is a jew.
‒ He states that the video when we see Mohamed Atta registering his flight was faked by Zionists.
‒ He states that all the confessional videos were faked by Zionists.
‒ He states that "Tim Donald Timmermann" is a jew because Timmermann is a common family name in Israel.
‒ And so on.


Because "Zalewski" sounds jewish for mehmetin.
Because "Zdenek" sounds jewish for mehmetin too.

He spots jews everywhere just by guessing. He was guessing so much he got banned from the forum I mentioned above. And he will deny to be antisemitic despite all that crap.

All this has been (painfully) obvious from very early on.

Tell us: Does he learn from his mistakes? I'm suspecting not...