9/11 "Conspiracy" Theories

mickeyrat

so, poor student at flight school for these planes. did he complete the course? pass final testing? he did have a valid pilots license.

mcgruff10

mickeyrat said:

so, poor student at flight school for these planes. did he complete the course? pass final testing? he did have a valid pilots license.

So if he had a valid pilots license why the need to ask the two prior questions?

mickeyrat

 I will be talking to my wifes nephew (our age 50) tomorrow about the accuracy of the findings. he is a commercial pilot working for a midlevel budget airline

my2hands

I see some people using the term "conspiracy theorist" as a demeaning term... let me ask this

Russian Apartment Bombings: are those that believe the Putin led Russian  government was complicit in the bombings the bad "conspiracy theorists", or no because you agree with them?

Gulf of Tomkin: are those that believe it was a false flag operation used to justify escalation of the Vietnam war the dirty evil "conspiracy theorists"?

Pearl Harbor: FDR and the top brass allowed it, more tinfoil "conspiracy theorists"?

Reichstag Fire: nah, that was really the Jews

Let me guess, JFK, RFK, MLK were all taken out by lone crazed gunmen, right?


Whipped into shape, now they've got you in line

 

Gern Blansten

This is insane.  After all of the evidence provided, there are still a few on here completely ignoring the evidence and continuing to push absolute bullshit.

There were 136 eyewitnesses to the plane hitting the pentagon.  Exactly 0 witnesses described anything hitting the pentagon other than an airplane.

Continuing to ignore that is just straight up ignorant.

Go Beavers

my2hands said:

I see some people using the term "conspiracy theorist" as a demeaning term... let me ask this

Russian Apartment Bombings: are those that believe the Putin led Russian  government was complicit in the bombings the bad "conspiracy theorists", or no because you agree with them?

Gulf of Tomkin: are those that believe it was a false flag operation used to justify escalation of the Vietnam war the dirty evil "conspiracy theorists"?

Pearl Harbor: FDR and the top brass allowed it, more tinfoil "conspiracy theorists"?

Reichstag Fire: nah, that was really the Jews

Let me guess, JFK, RFK, MLK were all taken out by lone crazed gunmen, right?


Whipped into shape, now they've got you in line

 

Trying to connect unrelated things is an example of bad logic conspiracy theorists use

my2hands

Go Beavers said:

my2hands said:

I see some people using the term "conspiracy theorist" as a demeaning term... let me ask this

Russian Apartment Bombings: are those that believe the Putin led Russian  government was complicit in the bombings the bad "conspiracy theorists", or no because you agree with them?

Gulf of Tomkin: are those that believe it was a false flag operation used to justify escalation of the Vietnam war the dirty evil "conspiracy theorists"?

Pearl Harbor: FDR and the top brass allowed it, more tinfoil "conspiracy theorists"?

Reichstag Fire: nah, that was really the Jews

Let me guess, JFK, RFK, MLK were all taken out by lone crazed gunmen, right?


Whipped into shape, now they've got you in line

 

Trying to connect unrelated things is an example of bad logic conspiracy theorists use

That's not what I was doing

I just noticed some like to belittle "conspiracy theorists", unless of course it's a conspiracy they believe in.

my2hands

By the way, I've made no direct accusations and dont claim to know everything or what happened that day. But I also have a healthy understanding of how evil humans can be, and the evil things committed by the American government and other governments throughout history 

Gern Blansten

my2hands said:

By the way, I've made no direct accusations and dont claim to know everything or what happened that day. But I also have a healthy understanding of how evil humans can be, and the evil things committed by the American government and other governments throughout history 

I wasn't there either....but I know enough to accept that 136 eyewitnesses probably have a better idea than I do as to what hit the pentagon.  Going beyond that is ignorant.

my2hands

No offense, I heard you the first 12 times my friend

mcgruff10

my2hands said:

No offense, I heard you the first 12 times my friend

Are you telling me there are 136 eyewitnesses?  remember, 1+3+6=10 which is between 9 and 11.  Boom!

dignin

Halifax2TheMax said:

mcgruff10 said:

dignin said:

mcgruff10 said:

So everyone telling to stop asking questions, you are 100% ok with the official version of 9/11?  No questions at all?  Nothing in your gut tells you to question anything on that day? 
On a different note, this thread reminds me of people who get so agitated and pissed off when other fans rip something like riot act.  It isn’t like you wrote it so why be that mad? Why are you so damn defensive about people discussing 9/11 conspiracy theories?  No one told you to clink on this link. 

Why do people get so defensive when Alex Jones calls Sandy Hook a false flag attack? He's only asking questions.

I didn't see those little kids getting blown to bits on video so I can't for sure say it happened. 

Alex jones is a joke and everyone knows it. This has absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 so why bring it up. 
The same government that sold us on the gulf of Tonkin incident gave us an official report on 9/11. 

The same people in government during the Gulf of Tonkin incident were in power or in the government on 9/11/01, 37 years previously? That's some longevity.

Also, comparing the Tonkin incident to 9/11 is ridiculous. 

my2hands

mcgruff10 said:

my2hands said:

No offense, I heard you the first 12 times my friend

Are you telling me there are 136 eyewitnesses?  remember, 1+3+6=10 which is between 9 and 11.  Boom!

Boom!!!

I think it was Colonel Mustard in the library myself

Halifax2TheMax

The Team Trump Treason PTape was in WTC7 but putin on the ritz is smart enough to have multiple copies.

mickeyrat

Ok, just got off the phone with Johnny. Turns out he was an instructor at that flight school, leaving in 99.

Said he trained that guy and he was arrogant, basically refused to learn just overall an asshole.. so this wasnt exactly as if he had no skill or ability. He was a poor student because of attitude.

further, he absolutely could have been the pilot and completed that mission. In fact he said that had he developed more, he could have done far more damage to the pentagon. That he frankly came in too low and was short.

in his opinion, there was no question he did it.

Gern Blansten

mickeyrat said:

Ok, just got off the phone with Johnny. Turns out he was an instructor at that flight school, leaving in 99.

Said he trained that guy and he was arrogant, basically refused to learn just overall an asshole.. so this wasnt exactly as if he had no skill or ability. He was a poor student because of attitude.

further, he absolutely could have been the pilot and completed that mission. In fact he said that had he developed more, he could have done far more damage to the pentagon. That he frankly came in too low and was short.

in his opinion, there was no question he did it.

so in his opinion PLUS 136 eyewitnesses

That still isn't good enough for some here.  They won't believe anything until that grainy video shows the dude sitting in the pilot seat.

They also don't believe the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour because they don't have a grainy parking lot video of it.

mickeyrat

Gern Blansten said:

mickeyrat said:

Ok, just got off the phone with Johnny. Turns out he was an instructor at that flight school, leaving in 99.

Said he trained that guy and he was arrogant, basically refused to learn just overall an asshole.. so this wasnt exactly as if he had no skill or ability. He was a poor student because of attitude.

further, he absolutely could have been the pilot and completed that mission. In fact he said that had he developed more, he could have done far more damage to the pentagon. That he frankly came in too low and was short.

in his opinion, there was no question he did it.

so in his opinion PLUS 136 eyewitnesses

That still isn't good enough for some here.  They won't believe anything until that grainy video shows the dude sitting in the pilot seat.

They also don't believe the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour because they don't have a grainy parking lot video of it.

I have/had no expectation of changing anyones mind. The question was posed to ask a pilot. I did. Frankly I was surprised he trained the dude.

Simply intended to offer the opinion of an experienced pilot to be taken and judged how ever anyone will.

some questions will never be answered.

Gern Blansten

mickeyrat said:

Gern Blansten said:

mickeyrat said:

Ok, just got off the phone with Johnny. Turns out he was an instructor at that flight school, leaving in 99.

Said he trained that guy and he was arrogant, basically refused to learn just overall an asshole.. so this wasnt exactly as if he had no skill or ability. He was a poor student because of attitude.

further, he absolutely could have been the pilot and completed that mission. In fact he said that had he developed more, he could have done far more damage to the pentagon. That he frankly came in too low and was short.

in his opinion, there was no question he did it.

so in his opinion PLUS 136 eyewitnesses

That still isn't good enough for some here.  They won't believe anything until that grainy video shows the dude sitting in the pilot seat.

They also don't believe the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour because they don't have a grainy parking lot video of it.

I have/had no expectation of changing anyones mind. The question was posed to ask a pilot. I did. Frankly I was surprised he trained the dude.

Simply intended to offer the opinion of an experienced pilot to be taken and judged how ever anyone will.

some questions will never be answered.

Yeah no offense intended 

mickeyrat

Gern Blansten said:

mickeyrat said:

Gern Blansten said:

mickeyrat said:

Ok, just got off the phone with Johnny. Turns out he was an instructor at that flight school, leaving in 99.

Said he trained that guy and he was arrogant, basically refused to learn just overall an asshole.. so this wasnt exactly as if he had no skill or ability. He was a poor student because of attitude.

further, he absolutely could have been the pilot and completed that mission. In fact he said that had he developed more, he could have done far more damage to the pentagon. That he frankly came in too low and was short.

in his opinion, there was no question he did it.

so in his opinion PLUS 136 eyewitnesses

That still isn't good enough for some here.  They won't believe anything until that grainy video shows the dude sitting in the pilot seat.

They also don't believe the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour because they don't have a grainy parking lot video of it.

I have/had no expectation of changing anyones mind. The question was posed to ask a pilot. I did. Frankly I was surprised he trained the dude.

Simply intended to offer the opinion of an experienced pilot to be taken and judged how ever anyone will.

some questions will never be answered.

Yeah no offense intended 

none perceived.

my2hands

How many eye witnesses were there? 

I kid, I kid

You guys know I love you lol

my2hands

http://www.consensus911.org/point-pc-1/

Hello, operator?

riotgrl

I will add that my husband worked for one of our local news stations when 9/11 happened.  He spent 8 days at the Pentagon working that story.  He personally interviewed 50 people who all verify that they were there when the plane hit the Pentagon.  For what that's worth....

mace1229

mcgruff10 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

my2hands said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/04/us/a-trainee-noted-for-incompetence.html

"He could not fly at all"

Yup, why ask questions? Lol

if the goal is to crash the plane, how competent do you really need to be? makes sense that a basic understanding  of how flight controls work is sufficient when others will get the plane in the air and set for cruising altitude and speed.

Kamikaze Japanese pilots had decent training and few could fly that low and hit allied ships. 

They were also flying into flak and machine gun fire and typically tried to come straight down in a vertical dive bomb as opposed to a horizontal approach that flew them into direct fire. Apples and oranges.

Actually you could fly under the flak and machine guns and be ok. But whatever, forget the world war 2 comparisons. My bad on that. The dude was a shit pilot and again, under very very stressful conditions probably similar to those in ww2, made a huge 270 degree circle, hit multiple poles, a generator at just feet above the ground amongst the cries of passengers and some how crashed the plane in an area with very little people all while not being captured on film?  Yeah there is something more there. If questions don’t arise in your brain about this then I have a bridge to sell you. 

Sorry, that made me chuckle.

mcgruff10

mace1229 said:

mcgruff10 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

my2hands said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/04/us/a-trainee-noted-for-incompetence.html

"He could not fly at all"

Yup, why ask questions? Lol

if the goal is to crash the plane, how competent do you really need to be? makes sense that a basic understanding  of how flight controls work is sufficient when others will get the plane in the air and set for cruising altitude and speed.

Kamikaze Japanese pilots had decent training and few could fly that low and hit allied ships. 

They were also flying into flak and machine gun fire and typically tried to come straight down in a vertical dive bomb as opposed to a horizontal approach that flew them into direct fire. Apples and oranges.

Actually you could fly under the flak and machine guns and be ok. But whatever, forget the world war 2 comparisons. My bad on that. The dude was a shit pilot and again, under very very stressful conditions probably similar to those in ww2, made a huge 270 degree circle, hit multiple poles, a generator at just feet above the ground amongst the cries of passengers and some how crashed the plane in an area with very little people all while not being captured on film?  Yeah there is something more there. If questions don’t arise in your brain about this then I have a bridge to sell you. 

Sorry, that made me chuckle.

Lol. Brain fart for sure lol 

Gern Blansten

riotgrl said:

I will add that my husband worked for one of our local news stations when 9/11 happened.  He spent 8 days at the Pentagon working that story.  He personally interviewed 50 people who all verify that they were there when the plane hit the Pentagon.  For what that's worth....

And yet some here still refuse to accept the eyewitness accounts.  And the official investigative reports, etc.

Ignorance is bliss.

mcgruff10

my2hands said:

http://www.consensus911.org/point-pc-1/

Hello, operator?

Wow.

HughFreakingDillon

mcgruff10 said:

my2hands said:

http://www.consensus911.org/point-pc-1/

Hello, operator?

Wow.

I don't get a "wow" reaction from that. especially the "it's implausible he didn't want to call his wife if he thought he was going to die". how is that "the best evidence?". Lots of people would react that way in that situation. the only thing I found interesting was multiple calls from the same phone coming in at identical times. which raises some technical questions, but for me that's about it. 

what I find interesting about the pentagon flight in this thread, is some people are willing to believe one flight instructor that the guy wasn't good enough to crash the plane into a target, yet dismiss 136 people who say they saw a plane, and people on the scene who said they handled the wreckage. 

confirmation bias, anyone?

Go Beavers

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

my2hands said:

http://www.consensus911.org/point-pc-1/

Hello, operator?

Wow.

what I find interesting about the pentagon flight in this thread, is some people are willing to believe one flight instructor that the guy wasn't good enough to crash the plane into a target, yet dismiss 136 people who say they saw a plane, and people on the scene who said they handled the wreckage. 

confirmation bias, anyone?

I agree. The people asking questions suddenly stopped at the point when they heard what one flight instructor said. This actually raises many more questions, like what what the instructors contact with him, what led him to say he couldn’t fly? How easy is it to direct the plane mid floght, as opposed to take off and landing? What other flight training did he have after his contact with this instructor? It said he had more simulator training. How much and how didnhe do with that? 

tbergs

Go Beavers said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

my2hands said:

http://www.consensus911.org/point-pc-1/

Hello, operator?

Wow.

what I find interesting about the pentagon flight in this thread, is some people are willing to believe one flight instructor that the guy wasn't good enough to crash the plane into a target, yet dismiss 136 people who say they saw a plane, and people on the scene who said they handled the wreckage. 

confirmation bias, anyone?

I agree. The people asking questions suddenly stopped at the point when they heard what one flight instructor said. This actually raises many more questions, like what what the instructors contact with him, what led him to say he couldn’t fly? How easy is it to direct the plane mid floght, as opposed to take off and landing? What other flight training did he have after his contact with this instructor? It said he had more simulator training. How much and how didnhe do with that? 

And then ironically, we are ok dismissing the Verizon operator "witness" account and the questions raised by it. Confirmation bias abound!

I think it was also interesting that his phone made several calls after the flight crashed.

What this whole story of unlikely events does for me is either confirm everything that happened as reported was a miracle (from the phone call, to the strategic turn to hit the pentagon) and that there are other forces beyond our comprehension at play or that it is all one big conspiracy. I don't buy either completely, but do believe in fate and extreme luck while also understanding that humans (especially politically motivated ones) will take advantage of situations to promote their agenda based on a mostly accurate depiction of events that might be embellished to promote heroism and give a grieving nation hope in the face of extreme tragedy. None of us will really ever know and our damn brains can't handle not knowing something definitively.

Gern Blansten

tbergs said:

Go Beavers said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

my2hands said:

http://www.consensus911.org/point-pc-1/

Hello, operator?

Wow.

what I find interesting about the pentagon flight in this thread, is some people are willing to believe one flight instructor that the guy wasn't good enough to crash the plane into a target, yet dismiss 136 people who say they saw a plane, and people on the scene who said they handled the wreckage. 

confirmation bias, anyone?

I agree. The people asking questions suddenly stopped at the point when they heard what one flight instructor said. This actually raises many more questions, like what what the instructors contact with him, what led him to say he couldn’t fly? How easy is it to direct the plane mid floght, as opposed to take off and landing? What other flight training did he have after his contact with this instructor? It said he had more simulator training. How much and how didnhe do with that? 

And then ironically, we are ok dismissing the Verizon operator "witness" account and the questions raised by it. Confirmation bias abound!

I think it was also interesting that his phone made several calls after the flight crashed.

What this whole story of unlikely events does for me is either confirm everything that happened as reported was a miracle (from the phone call, to the strategic turn to hit the pentagon) and that there are other forces beyond our comprehension at play or that it is all one big conspiracy. I don't buy either completely, but do believe in fate and extreme luck while also understanding that humans (especially politically motivated ones) will take advantage of situations to promote their agenda based on a mostly accurate depiction of events that might be embellished to promote heroism and give a grieving nation hope in the face of extreme tragedy. None of us will really ever know and our damn brains can't handle not knowing something definitively.

Right but you are assuming that the conspiracy link provided is legit.