9/11 "Conspiracy" Theories

dignin

my2hands said:

As a side note, I love when "adults" get upset about even discussing this. I think it's odd.

Not upset at all, I would say mildly annoyed. I just think people that don't get it and want to discuss this every year when they are easily debunked are willfully ignorant. If you think that the article I linked to was weak I suggest you buy the book I linked to that fully explains and debunks these nonsense conspiracy theories. 

mcgruff10

My questions/doubt with the Pentagon is:
There must be dozens of cameras around the pentagon, only one camera captured the plane hitting the pentagon.  Only one!  
And then the pilot that didn't know how to fly: It is amazing how the pilot could have steered a huge commercial airliner in the way he did, first making a large turn around the pentagon, and then diving into the pentagon while hitting light poles just feet above the ground at full speed. And then by chance he hits the Pentagon in the a spot that is hardly occupied?  Wasn't that area recently renovated?

Again, I obviously don't have the answers to any of this but I always felt something wasn't right with the story they gave us.

KC138045

Gern Blansten said:

What is it that the conspiracy theorists think happened to flight 77?  If the plane didn't hit the pentagon (as 136 eyewitnesses say) then where did it go?  

They hid it on the other side of the ice wall that keeps all of us from falling off flat earth

dignin

KC138045 said:

Gern Blansten said:

What is it that the conspiracy theorists think happened to flight 77?  If the plane didn't hit the pentagon (as 136 eyewitnesses say) then where did it go?  

They hid it on the other side of the ice wall that keeps all of us from falling off flat earth

Flat earth? I'm pretty sure it's a giant turtle.

mace1229

mcgruff10 said:

My questions/doubt with the Pentagon is:
There must be dozens of cameras around the pentagon, only one camera captured the plane hitting the pentagon.  Only one!  
And then the pilot that didn't know how to fly: It is amazing how the pilot could have steered a huge commercial airliner in the way he did, first making a large turn around the pentagon, and then diving into the pentagon while hitting light poles just feet above the ground at full speed. And then by chance he hits the Pentagon in the a spot that is hardly occupied?  Wasn't that area recently renovated?

Again, I obviously don't have the answers to any of this but I always felt something wasn't right with the story they gave us.

Its easy to forget how little we cared about security 18 years ago. I sometimes watch an old movie and laugh at airport scenes.
No one thought anyone would dare attack the pentagon, especially not a country we weren't at war with. So it isn't surprising to me if only 1 security camera caught it.

KC138045

dignin said:

KC138045 said:

Gern Blansten said:

What is it that the conspiracy theorists think happened to flight 77?  If the plane didn't hit the pentagon (as 136 eyewitnesses say) then where did it go?  

They hid it on the other side of the ice wall that keeps all of us from falling off flat earth

Flat earth? I'm pretty sure it's a giant turtle.

Haha....my apologies 

has anyone talked to the turtle to see what he knows?

oftenreading

Some expanded detail on why we don't have crisp, clear security video footage of the approaching plane.

http://www.9-11tv.org/the-pentagon-plane-puzzle/85-pentagon-area-surveillance-cameras

Better to read the whole article, which isn't long but is too long to post fully, but here's a snippet:

Why very few cameras captured the impact event

There are a number of valid reasons why only 4 of the 85 videos were released by the FBI in response to a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) request filed in 2004, which was fulfilled in 2006. Because of a number of factors (listed below and detailed in the footnotes) only 2 of the 85 cameras captured any useful footage of the plane-impact event[1].

• Most of those 85 cameras were not aimed in the direction of the Pentagon and/or at the part of the Pentagon in question.
• Most cameras were located a considerable distance from the impact event, and virtually all surveillance cameras had wide-angle (fisheye) lenses which cause some geometric distortion and render distant objects at very low resolution.
• Many cameras had obstructed views of the Pentagon impact area.
• In 2001, virtually all surveillance cameras had low spacial resolution.
• In 2001, most surveillance cameras recorded at low frame rates (low temporal resolution), in the range of one to eight frames per second.  By comparison, American TV is most often 30 frames/second.
• The high speed of the plane, accelerating to around 550 mph, resulted in image blurring, and offered a low chance of catching more than a single frame of the plane, given the low-recorded frame rate (one frame/sec)

mcgruff10

oftenreading said:

Some expanded detail on why we don't have crisp, clear security video footage of the approaching plane.

http://www.9-11tv.org/the-pentagon-plane-puzzle/85-pentagon-area-surveillance-cameras

Better to read the whole article, which isn't long but is too long to post fully, but here's a snippet:

Why very few cameras captured the impact event

There are a number of valid reasons why only 4 of the 85 videos were released by the FBI in response to a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) request filed in 2004, which was fulfilled in 2006. Because of a number of factors (listed below and detailed in the footnotes) only 2 of the 85 cameras captured any useful footage of the plane-impact event[1].

• Most of those 85 cameras were not aimed in the direction of the Pentagon and/or at the part of the Pentagon in question.
• Most cameras were located a considerable distance from the impact event, and virtually all surveillance cameras had wide-angle (fisheye) lenses which cause some geometric distortion and render distant objects at very low resolution.
• Many cameras had obstructed views of the Pentagon impact area.
• In 2001, virtually all surveillance cameras had low spacial resolution.
• In 2001, most surveillance cameras recorded at low frame rates (low temporal resolution), in the range of one to eight frames per second.  By comparison, American TV is most often 30 frames/second.
• The high speed of the plane, accelerating to around 550 mph, resulted in image blurring, and offered a low chance of catching more than a single frame of the plane, given the low-recorded frame rate (one frame/sec)

Solid article.  Thank you.

Gern Blansten

mcgruff10 said:

My questions/doubt with the Pentagon is:
There must be dozens of cameras around the pentagon, only one camera captured the plane hitting the pentagon.  Only one!  
And then the pilot that didn't know how to fly: It is amazing how the pilot could have steered a huge commercial airliner in the way he did, first making a large turn around the pentagon, and then diving into the pentagon while hitting light poles just feet above the ground at full speed. And then by chance he hits the Pentagon in the a spot that is hardly occupied?  Wasn't that area recently renovated?

Again, I obviously don't have the answers to any of this but I always felt something wasn't right with the story they gave us.

And what about the 136 eyewitnesses?  Why do you act like they don't exist?  They do.

mcgruff10

mace1229 said:

mcgruff10 said:

My questions/doubt with the Pentagon is:
There must be dozens of cameras around the pentagon, only one camera captured the plane hitting the pentagon.  Only one!  
And then the pilot that didn't know how to fly: It is amazing how the pilot could have steered a huge commercial airliner in the way he did, first making a large turn around the pentagon, and then diving into the pentagon while hitting light poles just feet above the ground at full speed. And then by chance he hits the Pentagon in the a spot that is hardly occupied?  Wasn't that area recently renovated?

Again, I obviously don't have the answers to any of this but I always felt something wasn't right with the story they gave us.

Its easy to forget how little we cared about security 18 years ago. I sometimes watch an old movie and laugh at airport scenes.
No one thought anyone would dare attack the pentagon, especially not a country we weren't at war with. So it isn't surprising to me if only 1 security camera caught it.

Excellent points and you would be correct.  

dignin

KC138045 said:

dignin said:

KC138045 said:

Gern Blansten said:

What is it that the conspiracy theorists think happened to flight 77?  If the plane didn't hit the pentagon (as 136 eyewitnesses say) then where did it go?  

They hid it on the other side of the ice wall that keeps all of us from falling off flat earth

Flat earth? I'm pretty sure it's a giant turtle.

Haha....my apologies 

has anyone talked to the turtle to see what he knows?

I've never been that high. I think it's an attainable goal though.

Edit: Will report back when I have made contact.

my2hands

Rule #1 of any investigation: eye witnesses are the absolute worst form of evidence

Just saying, feel free to keep being angry lol

mcgruff10

my2hands said:

Rule #1 of any investigation: eye witnesses are the absolute worst form of evidence

Just saying, feel free to keep being angry lol

I always thought that when dealing with a crime scene you take your time and really comb the crime scene.  If I recall correctly after the pentagon attack the blue tarps came out awfully quick. “Evidence” was removed in the blink of an eye. 

my2hands

So... the popular mechanics article... or should I say the three paragraphs....

No mention of the shitty amateur pilot pulling a top gun manuever at 500 mph a few feet off the ground and hitting bullseye like a professional pilot in a dam fighter jet... coincidentally in the one section of the pentagon that was recently renovated and fairly empty 

The first guy says the hole doesnt fit with the size of a 737 striking the building because after initial impact it poured into the building like a liquid......... then the next guy says he's picking up debris, uniforms, etc... 

2001 they could spot a fly from space, it wasn't 1901, that video is a joke.... and do we really think that plane would get anywhere near the fucking pentagon? I've heard the excuses about why it wasnt intercepted, I'm not exactly buying that shit. How many fighters are in the DC area ready on trigger status? But this flunky made it through in a commercial airliner 

I think it's funny people get so upset and try to shut down anybody just posing questions

Meanwhile, the same crew had no problem killing a few hundred thousand people based on lies. But yeah, everything else was on the up & up



Riddle me this....... let's roll..... ever make a call from 30,000 feet? In 2001 on your flip celly?

Halifax2TheMax

my2hands said:

So... the popular mechanics article... or should I say the three paragraphs....

No mention of the shitty amateur pilot pulling a top gun manuever at 500 mph a few feet off the ground and hitting bullseye like a professional pilot in a dam fighter jet... coincidentally in the one section of the pentagon that was recently renovated and fairly empty 

The first guy says the hole doesnt fit with the size of a 737 striking the building because after initial impact it poured into the building like a liquid......... then the next guy says he's picking up debris, uniforms, etc... 

2001 they could spot a fly from space, it wasn't 1901, that video is a joke.... and do we really think that plane would get anywhere near the fucking pentagon? I've heard the excuses about why it wasnt intercepted, I'm not exactly buying that shit. How many fighters are in the DC area ready on trigger status? But this flunky made it through in a commercial airliner 

I think it's funny people get so upset and try to shut down anybody just posing questions

Meanwhile, the same crew had no problem killing a few hundred thousand people based on lies. But yeah, everything else was on the up & up



Riddle me this....... let's roll..... ever make a call from 30,000 feet?

Ever use one of those phones that was in the back of every airplane seat and that was made specifically for making calls at 30,000 feet and higher, at cruising altitude? It’s not like they had to drop a dime. And they even had cords! Imagine that?

oftenreading

my2hands said:

So... the popular mechanics article... or should I say the three paragraphs....

No mention of the shitty amateur pilot pulling a top gun manuever at 500 mph a few feet off the ground and hitting bullseye like a professional pilot in a dam fighter jet... coincidentally in the one section of the pentagon that was recently renovated and fairly empty 

The first guy says the hole doesnt fit with the size of a 737 striking the building because after initial impact it poured into the building like a liquid......... then the next guy says he's picking up debris, uniforms, etc... 

2001 they could spot a fly from space, it wasn't 1901, that video is a joke.... and do we really think that plane would get anywhere near the fucking pentagon? I've heard the excuses about why it wasnt intercepted, I'm not exactly buying that shit. How many fighters are in the DC area ready on trigger status? But this flunky made it through in a commercial airliner 

I think it's funny people get so upset and try to shut down anybody just posing questions

Meanwhile, the same crew had no problem killing a few hundred thousand people based on lies. But yeah, everything else was on the up & up



Riddle me this....... let's roll..... ever make a call from 30,000 feet?

The cell phone information is out there, too. If one cares to read it. 

Why is it a coincidence that it crashed into a relatively unpopulated area? Why does it matter which part of the building it crashed into?

And why do you say that the "video is a joke" when there's info as to the actual specs of those video cameras?

Continually repeating the same questions when they've already been answered doesn't lend additional credence.

pjhawks

my2hands said:

So... the popular mechanics article... or should I say the three paragraphs....

No mention of the shitty amateur pilot pulling a top gun manuever at 500 mph a few feet off the ground and hitting bullseye like a professional pilot in a dam fighter jet... coincidentally in the one section of the pentagon that was recently renovated and fairly empty 

The first guy says the hole doesnt fit with the size of a 737 striking the building because after initial impact it poured into the building like a liquid......... then the next guy says he's picking up debris, uniforms, etc... 

2001 they could spot a fly from space, it wasn't 1901, that video is a joke.... and do we really think that plane would get anywhere near the fucking pentagon? I've heard the excuses about why it wasnt intercepted, I'm not exactly buying that shit. How many fighters are in the DC area ready on trigger status? But this flunky made it through in a commercial airliner 

I think it's funny people get so upset and try to shut down anybody just posing questions

Meanwhile, the same crew had no problem killing a few hundred thousand people based on lies. But yeah, everything else was on the up & up



Riddle me this....... let's roll..... ever make a call from 30,000 feet? In 2001 on your flip celly?

so where did the flight go? how did we dispose of those people on the flight? how did the flight skip past air traffic controllers or were there air traffic controllers in on the conspiracy too?  just. stop already

Halifax2TheMax

my2hands said:

So... the popular mechanics article... or should I say the three paragraphs....

No mention of the shitty amateur pilot pulling a top gun manuever at 500 mph a few feet off the ground and hitting bullseye like a professional pilot in a dam fighter jet... coincidentally in the one section of the pentagon that was recently renovated and fairly empty 

The first guy says the hole doesnt fit with the size of a 737 striking the building because after initial impact it poured into the building like a liquid......... then the next guy says he's picking up debris, uniforms, etc... 

2001 they could spot a fly from space, it wasn't 1901, that video is a joke.... and do we really think that plane would get anywhere near the fucking pentagon? I've heard the excuses about why it wasnt intercepted, I'm not exactly buying that shit. How many fighters are in the DC area ready on trigger status? But this flunky made it through in a commercial airliner 

I think it's funny people get so upset and try to shut down anybody just posing questions

Meanwhile, the same crew had no problem killing a few hundred thousand people based on lies. But yeah, everything else was on the up & up



Riddle me this....... let's roll..... ever make a call from 30,000 feet? In 2001 on your flip celly?

Here you go, specifically debunk what is explained here:

https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/10/07/bringing-closure-to-the-911-pentagon-debate/

Aspects recreated, duplicated, eyewitness accounts verified.

mcgruff10

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. 

Halifax2TheMax

34 miles from Dulles Airport to the Pentagon. Not too difficult to see how a plane can get close to the Pentagon when you have three major airports within an hour and if a plane appears to be turning around to return to the airport how it could come in low and fast at 550 mph before fighter jets could be scrambled to intercept it.