after years of honestly looking at both sides of the arguments and checking the argumentative flaws of both sides, i came o my personal conclusion that its at best "let it happen" job.

when you are in power, you can take advantage of any situation, no need to stage any of this and risk your position.

sorry if i disapoint with this.

I'm 99.9% certain that the piloting and navigation couldn't even conceivably have been carried out by the people who supposedly did it, and equally that the official story regarding the air-traffic control is complete bullshit. I can explain this in quite some depth if required.

I could comment about all the other stuff, but I know enough about this, and know people who work for NATS who also believe that it is bullshit, so if this were the case, it would have to have been made to happen.

There are plenty of pilots who don't believe this, but in my opinion believe is the key word. I simply don't think they have looked at what occurred critically.

You could run a poll with some options...

yes, no, let it happen job, etc.

do i think some in washington knew...yes. I think top level knew...cheney and rumsfeld probably a lot...i think bush knew too...the top level.

lots of vested interests and things to gain for many people, from patriot acts, to invading iraq, the building owners and leasees sure as hell didnt lose.

Not all of them are inside USA so i dont know if 'inside job' is the right word either.

the multinational corporations stood to gain from all this, not just USA.

the final phase of a long planned one world order was to control the last left independants in the middle east i think...and 9/11 was another tool i think.

this is bigger than USA, this is a one world UN thing, the idea of which, a wet dream back then if you will, goes back thousands of years...maybe alexander of macedon was the first with this idea, not sure, but the idea goes back far...technology has made it possible.



Listen between the lines when bush speaks.

and listen how he mentions the UN and the vision of its founders

My wife's cousin, who I know very well, works for American Airlines in Texas. If he doesn't sign the sheet, the plane doesn't fly. He services Lear jets on the side.

He told me about these airline test pilots, all crazy ex-USAF guys usually, who take new/repaired planes up and throw them about...a lot. He went up with them once, and that was enough for him.

They all said that could not have flown at that speed, at that height, and performed the manouvers those planes did.

jhado wrote: what maneuver did they do that wasso hard?they flew the planes into a building as wide asa footbal field at high speed.
even if theyd have missed it, theyd have crashed in the heart of new york.

not to sound offensive but what is your point?are you saying there was no planes?

saying thew spees arent humanly possible kinda implies there was no planes

wake_up_bomb wrote: well, a true pilot has no agenda to destroy the plane, he tries to fly safe.

ever tried to go all crazy in a car?youd find its capable of more than you previously thought, it happened to me.

if the alleged arabs didnt fly it, who did?did some american friends of bush sacrifice themselves?i dont think thats plausible.

hadabusa wrote: It's obviously impossible for me to say what did happen, obviously many people who are better qualified than me believe the plane was flown remotely.

I won't copy and paste the whole post, but you can read about some of the technical issues related to the navigation and piloting that supposedly happened on 9/11 here:

forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=209263

Here are some more threads regarding the piloting, navigation and air-traffic control response on 9/11:

forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=208668

forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=209763

forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=208850

forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=209071

forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=208669

Make your own mind up, though, you're welcome to your opinion and I'm not trying to convince you, and I've had enough debates for this lifetime, quite honestly!

hadabusa wrote:
Is auto-pilots not possible?

How about an auto pilot override, configured into the plane beforehand...then activated, and screwing the pilots too...maybe they were full of real willing passengers and real pilots, all of whom didnt know what was coming.

just some ideas.

i think these things are possible from a technical POV, just need to be implemented by the right people...in this case would have to be rogue aircraft engineers. I think there is people who would do it for money, and even then they might not be breathing long after, they just didnt realise at the time.

novum wrote: one thing i havent done yet is look into pilots for 911 forums, ill do that.

but bush and bin laden had quite the fallout years before this, they werent always buddies

wake_up_bomb wrote: thanks ill check those

hadabusa wrote:
I'm only telling you what I was told. By someone who knows a damn site more than you do about aeronauatics.

hadabusa wrote:
sure. Its still possible for a UN/elite cabal organised false flag and blame it on bin laden though.

to me afghanistan is about control of the region, and opium trade...maybe some minerals also.

not "terror" this is BS UN elite rhetoric...anyone who isnt one of them or doing what they want, or controlled by them is a 'terrorist' by default.

so bin laden was a terrorist and bush didnt like him, simply because he didnt do what they say, and before technology got to recent levels, they (US/UK/UN empire) couldnt do shit about it, in my opinion.

If they cant win with finance/diplomacy/threats...and Imran Khan himself has said taliban dont give a shit about money...then they will do it with force as last resort.

BTW Imran Khan is in with the goldsmiths and rothschilds, and they want him in neighbouring Pakistan as President for obvious reasons.

This is a fascinating subject and I must confess that apart from watching a few documentaries and reading a few articles, I feel that I don't know enough to pass judgement. All I can say is that I'm pretty sure that there was more to it than meets the eye, and that very little would surprise me...

I remember exactly where I was when I heard the breaking news of 9/11 on the radio - standing at the sink in my little bedsit! It's also the same day as my Dad's birthday, so he's not going to forget it in a hurry...

I've read quite a bit lately about people claiming to have developed illnesses in the wake of 9/11, including the late Donna Summer - I'd be very interested to find out more about that.

Mandy

quietgirl wrote: Essentially, the US Environmental Protection Agency, under pressure one assumes, told people that it was safe to go back to work in the area surrounding Ground Zero before it was actually safe to do so, and they covered-up the evidence they had which contradicted this advice. You can read more about this here:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Envi...oversy#Main_findings

www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/nyregion/25toxic.html

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/07/cat...epa-ground-zero-dust

Considering the health consequences for first respondents:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_ari...round_Zero_illnesses

...there were almost certainly people who died as a result of this.

A friend flies one of those dodgy little Cessnas and, frankly, he can't burp in Airspace without the authorities knowing about it. Often, he has only seconds to comply with an instruction... or else he might become a "target".

That being the case, I can't see two planes of that size so suddenly and so shockingly "taking every sky authority unawares".

It was allowed. And, ultimately for some, very useful.

wake_up_bomb wrote:
Yes, in the Donna Summer is dead thread, coco said a large number of people are claiming to be suffering from the same ailments and not even able to get medical care for it.

cantata wrote: I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me. The US federal agency in charge of radiation has already raised the amount of radiation that it's 'safe' to be exposed to. They just cover these things up. You can't expect anything from these people unless you've got dozens of corporate lobbyists stationed in Washington fighting your corner for you.
cantata wrote: According to the OS, Flight 93 wasn't shot down. It crashed at 10:03am. This is nearly two hours after the planes that hit the twin towers began to fly off-course. By this time both twin towers had been hit, the Pentagon had been hit, and millions of people had watched the South Tower collapse on TV. But Flight 93 is still trundling around in American airspace! Absolutely ridiculous.

Thanks very much for the links, WUB - I'll have a good look at them tomorrow when I'm not quite so tired! Just clocked the time - I ought to hit the hay!

@ cantata - yes, it's terribly sad. A great injustice.

Mandy

jhado wrote:
I'm sure you're right, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't ask questions.

ewww. This smells decidedly DIFfy. In fact it's like a big steaming DIFfy turd.

Sorry, but here's my 10 cents on this;

And I've said sorry at the beginning because I do not intend to cause offence with what follows:

It costs between $150,000 and $200,000 to fill up a Boeing 747 with jet fuel, depending on the price of jet fuel at any given time. In January this year, the old Prudential Building, in Houston Texas, was demolished. It was brought down using something called 'controlled demolition'. (Watch it being demolished here, see if it reminds you of anything blog.chron.com/newswatch/2012/01/prudent...n-houston-destroyed/ )

In 2007, the estimated cost of demolishing this building using explosives was approx $6 million dollars. I do not know if the price of explosives has risen in line with inflation rates, but who gives a fuck, let's just go with $6 million.

Now, let's inject a bit of logic into this. I'm no Richard Branson, but I'm still a sucker for a good business plan. If we go with your 'they let it happen' theory, then what you are saying, is that logically we can take down most skyscrapers with 50,000 gallons of jet fuel, and pocket ourselves a nice fat profit by undercutting all these demolition experts, who for the life of them, still haven't worked out that all they need to do is phone up BP, not spend millions on explosives and highly qualified technicians that have trained for years in the art of brining down buildings.

So come on!! Let's fucking do this! What the fuck are we waiting for? The world's full of ageing skyscrapers that need pulling down! And apparently there's no end of stupid companies that think that they can't afford to demolish and rebuild! We'll show 'em!! All we need is jet fuel! We can undercut the so called 'experts' by 70%!! And still make a massive profit!

You know, the more I think about it, it amazes me that there's even a single demolition company on the planet still in existence!!

Clearly all demolition experts were asleep on 9/11 and have since converted to the Amish way.

Word puzzles calm me down... here's a nice one: Four letters, starts with T, rhymes with CAT.