Real Pilots Speak Out on 911

[240 is Back]

look, unless you hear the pop mech interview where the host tears them a new a-hole, you're going to believe they are credible.

they get caught in a few lies.  It's pretty embarassing.  They claim to have access to things nobody else saw, which would be illegal of course.  They make some claims in the mag that they didn't have evidence for.  They were asked questions where their response was, "you know, this is a lot like the holocaust..." to divert attention.

So anyway, unless you have heard that clip, you may give them credibility.  I dont wanna bust any bubbles, so keep on praising them as gospel, and those of us who have listened will know they get caught in a lot of lies.  cheerio.

[240 is Back]

anyway, fuck this discussion.... i've had it for 5 years and i refused to get sucked back in.  most of you sucked dubya til the end, you talked about how qualified palin was, etc etc. 

carry on in this ignorance.  You have CTs about oil rigs blowing up with zero evidence... yet the long line of Qs about 911 (which you dont actually know), you shit all over.

it's fine... not worth arguing over.

[12secGT]

So his whole argument is built on things like the FBI saying something 24 hours after the event took place? Because, you know, the FBI and other government agencies wouldn't lie to save face or calm down the public, etc, etc.  

I guess they need anything to hang onto.

And coming into a thread about 9/11, logging a dozen posts in said thread and then claiming to not have time to watch a 4 minute video is nothing but a cop out.

Man, your faster than me... I was thinking this same thing until I read it!

[tonymctones]

anyway, fuck this discussion.... i've had it for 5 years and i refused to get sucked back in.  most of you sucked dubya til the end, you talked about how qualified palin was, etc etc. 

carry on in this ignorance.  You have CTs about oil rigs blowing up with zero evidence... yet the long line of Qs about 911 (which you dont actually know), you shit all over.

it's fine... not worth arguing over.

LMAO then stop posting in threads about it fucker...you come in here post then run away when someone post shit that debunks yours saying they arent credible, you havent done your research etc...

if you dont want to talk about it THEN DONT TALK ABOUT IT!!!!!!!!!!!

[Soul Crusher]

240 is officially done on the 911 CT's

[kcballer]

   no one says there aren't questions that still need to be answered but EVERYONE with a brain knows those questions aren't 'was this an inside job' or 'bush did it'

[tonymctones]

  no one says there aren't questions that still need to be answered but EVERYONE with a brain knows those questions aren't 'was this an inside job' or 'bush did it'

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!

[kcballer]

in saying that i believe there are some cover up issues relating to what was known and when but those are regarding gross negligence not intent to bomb ones country. 

[tonymctones]

in saying that i believe there are some cover up issues relating to what was known and when but those are regarding gross negligence not intent to bomb ones country. 

I can agree with that as well

[240 is Back]

well yall bring my name up everytime.  i dont start 911 threads too much these days

[Skip8282]

anyway, fuck this discussion.... i've had it for 5 years and i refused to get sucked back in.  most of you sucked dubya til the end, you talked about how qualified palin was, etc etc.  

carry on in this ignorance.  You have CTs about oil rigs blowing up with zero evidence... yet the long line of Qs about 911 (which you dont actually know), you shit all over.

it's fine... not worth arguing over.

Let's see...I'll give you a 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, & 7.

10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes

1. Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always "sheep", patsies for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.

2. Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say "no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.

3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.

5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.

6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.

7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.

[Skip8282]

well yall bring my name up everytime.  i dont start 911 threads too much these days

That's horseshit and you know it.  You're actually going to try and claim you just don't drop random crap about 911 conspiracies into threads?  You like arguing this shit, dare I say you LOVE arguing this shit, and you keep throwing it out in various threads from time to time.

[tonymctones]

That's horseshit and you know it.  You're actually going to try and claim you just don't drop random crap about 911 conspiracies into threads?  You like arguing this shit, dare I say you LOVE arguing this shit, and you keep throwing it out in various threads from time to time.

exactly same as his palin references...

[quadzilla456]

Of course not. He and douchezilla the "architect" have been avoiding addressing any of those videos for 3+ pages now. They just keep regurgitating the same "you're a sheep" and "this poll shows people want a new investigation" trash.

Scrotum: Take a look at this you fucking mongrel...

[quadzilla456]

the walls were some 12 feet thick in areas and a minimum of 3 feet in others. The "inner sanctum" is over 20 ft thick.

So you are saying the outer walls were a minimum 3 feet thick? HAHAHAHA! Look we all know it is the Pentagon but really you think they would have a 3 feet thick outer wall??? Please at most it is 16 = 18 inches thick. If that. More likely it is 12 inches.

Look at the image below. Does the outer wall appear to be 3 feet solid? If you think so you are full of BS.

[tonymctones]

Scrotum: Take a look at this you fucking mongrel...

so youre claiming it was a missle quad?

[quadzilla456]

so youre claiming it was a missle quad?

It looks like that to me. What it does not look like to me is an airplane. What do you think?

[tonymctones]

It looks like that to me. What it does not look like to me is an airplane. What do you think?

what do you make of the 9/11 reports about cheney not ordering the plane to be shot down? wouldnt that ct fly in the face of your ct?

[quadzilla456]

what do you make of the 9/11 reports about cheney not ordering the plane to be shot down? wouldnt that ct fly in the face of your ct?

How do you even know that is what Cheney ordered? Would you even trust anything coming from such a lying piece of scum?!

I do know Rumsfeld slipped up about how they shot down the planes on video. Planes that might not even have been in the air. We know Rumsfeld is a moron but he actually comes out on TV and says missles were used on 9/11! I would not put much faith in a report claiming whatever Bush or Cheney did on 9/11.

[tonymctones]

How do you even know that is what Cheney ordered? Would you even trust anything coming from such a lying piece of scum?!

I do know Rumsfeld slipped up about how they shot down the planes on video. Planes that might not even have been in the air. We know Rumsfeld is a moron but he actually comes out on TV and says missles were used on 9/11! I would not put much faith in a report claiming whatever Bush or Cheney did on 9/11.

LMAO thats what the 9/11 commission found...not what cheney said he said...

so what you have is a couple of slip ups? thats solid proof bro...

im just trying to get what your ct is? the 9/11 commission came out and said one thing are you saying they are lying? this was reported by someone else not cheney quad...

so what happend to that flight then if it didnt hit the pentegon? what happend to the ppl? the pilots? where was the missle shot from?

[Skip8282]

Scrotum: Take a look at this you fucking mongrel...

Claim: Two holes were visible in the Pentagon immediately after the attack: a 75-ft.-wide entry hole in the building's exterior wall, and a 16-ft.-wide hole in Ring C, the Pentagon's middle ring. Conspiracy theorists claim both holes are far too small to have been made by a Boeing 757. "How does a plane 125 ft. wide and 155 ft. long fit into a hole which is only 16 ft. across?" asks reopen911.org, a Web site "dedicated to discovering the bottom line truth to what really occurred on September 11, 2001."

The truth is of even less importance to French author Thierry Meyssan, whose baseless assertions are fodder for even mainstream European and Middle Eastern media. In his book The Big Lie, Meyssan concludes that the Pentagon was struck by a satellite-guided missile—part of an elaborate U.S. military coup. "This attack," he writes, "could only be committed by United States military personnel against other U.S. military personnel."



FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide—not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.


http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon



Guess the whole ASCE and Popular Mechanics is in on the whole conspiracy.

[quadzilla456]

FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

Where is the 75 ft wide hole in this photo? This is the impact area that collapsed later. Come on you can do better than that!

[quadzilla456]

Where are the skidmarks? If you believe the official story the claim is that the plane skidded into the building at an impossbile low altitude. Look at the grass in this photo! Where's the evidence that an airplane had just flown over this grass a couple of feet above the ground??! Real pilots have also stated it is first of all impossible to fly such a plane only a few feet off the ground unless you are landing it and then the nose is pointing up which would have made a hole higher up in the building.

[tonymctones]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=618_1252533350&comment_order=newest_first

debunking 9/11 ct's one at a time...

[quadzilla456]

LMAO thats what the 9/11 commission found...not what cheney said he said...

so what you have is a couple of slip ups? thats solid proof bro...

im just trying to get what your ct is? the 9/11 commission came out and said one thing are you saying they are lying? this was reported by someone else not cheney quad...

so what happend to that flight then if it didnt hit the pentegon? what happend to the ppl? the pilots? where was the missle shot from?

But where is your proof that Cheney ordered anything? Of course you can't deliver it is top secret. Also if someone is in witness protection how would you prove their identity? Please prove to me that the flights and passengers are REAL. If they did not exist I can't prove that they did because it is impossible to prove a lie. The argument everyone like you make against the CT of 9/11 is how can everyone be in on it?! That assumes everyone knows the big picture and all that transpired. Everyone receives their marching orders from above and they played their little part they don't even know they are implicated. Do you think everyone had a bird's eye view of 9/11 as it unfolded?

Pick a flight victim from Pentagon and Pennsylvania and prove to me that you know 100% they are real and not a fabricated identity.