Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages 
more info on 911
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 79, 80, 81  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4592
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 13-09-2012 13:05    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jonfairway wrote:


on the ball or what !!!!!!!!! only his luggage was left behind and they sent a bomb sniffing dog and then called the FBI, that was before the explosion or just after ?

LIHOP maybe ?


Which explosion are you referring to?

If it was LIHOP then the plot would presumably have to have included at least one team of baggage-handlers. It hardly seems plausible to extend the plot so far for so little gain - the level of risk-taking would need to have been extraordinary.

It's also worth pointing out that Atta was misidentified in the immediate aftermath of the attacks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta#Mistaken_identity
Back to top
View user's profile 
JonfairwayOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Total posts: 1267
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 13-09-2012 13:22    Post subject: Reply with quote

hey hi Ted !!!

apparently Atta was identified by CAPPS that was why his luggage was held back, as were 5 others of the terrorists, all the others had no luggage to hold back.

just Atta and his complete works of confession held within Smile

very kind of him to make life so easy for the fbi.

now if that bag had been destroyed........

such luck in finding out who did the deed and so much unluckiness in stopping it happening.... given all the inteligence that was presented to Bush and co months before !!!!
Back to top
View user's profile 
ted_bloody_maulOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 23 May 2003
Total posts: 4592
Location: Quester's Psykick Dancehall
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 13-09-2012 13:42    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jonfairway wrote:
hey hi Ted !!!

apparently Atta was identified by CAPPS that was why his luggage was held back, as were 5 others of the terrorists, all the others had no luggage to hold back.

just Atta and his complete works of confession held within Smile

very kind of him to make life so easy for the fbi.

now if that bag had been destroyed........

such luck in finding out who did the deed and so much unluckiness in stopping it happening.... given all the inteligence that was presented to Bush and co months before !!!!


His luggage was held back because it was delivered late from his preceding flight. He was only allowed to board with one piece of hand-luggage. The article you cut and pasted from earlier explains all this:

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/deceptions/worldnetdaily_attasuit.html

This would require the baggage staff dispatching and handling his luggage between the two airports to be part of the plot. Do you really think this plausible? It certainly seems absurd given that identification was entirely possible without his luggage.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Identifying_the_Hijackers

It's also presuming that the LIHOP conspirators would find it neccessary to identify all the perpetrators in order to execute their plans. That's hardly the case since the identification of only a few (and the leader of the group especially) would have given them enough cause to wage war against Al Qaeda.
Back to top
View user's profile 
JonfairwayOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 09 Mar 2005
Total posts: 1267
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 14-09-2012 07:24    Post subject: Reply with quote

Atta was selected by CAPPS !

Quote:
September 11, 2001, attacksOn the morning of the September 11, 2001 attacks, several of the hijackers were selected by CAPPS. Wail al-Shehri, and Satam al-Suqami were selected for extra screening of their checked bags, before they boarded American Airlines Flight 11 at Logan International Airport. Waleed al-Shehri was also selected, but since he had checked no bags, CAPPS selection had no effect on him.[2] Mohamed Atta was selected by CAPPS when he checked in at Portland International Jetport.[3]

All five of the hijackers on American Airlines Flight 77 were CAPPS selectees, with Hani Hanjour, Khalid al-Mihdhar, and Majed Moqed chosen by the CAPPS criteria. Nawaf al-Hazmi and Salem al-Hazmi were selected because they did not provide adequate identification, and had their checked bags held until they boarded the aircraft.[2]

Ahmad al-Haznawi was the only hijacker selected of those on United Airlines Flight 93, and none of the hijackers of United Airlines Flight 175 were selected by CAPPS.[2]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Assisted_Passenger_Prescreening_System

that was why his baggage was held up....

they then said the baggage hold was locked and it was too late. so it would follow the next day.

all i am saying is isnt that convenient !!!!!! especially given its contents ????
they then have all the details of all hijackers within 24 hours with piccys to identify by booking in staff.

let me do a quick leap out of the box here.....
they already knew who they were ? as they were on the high terrorist profile list the FBI had already showed to the US governement saying a terrorist strike was planned !!!!

Its odd the person who booked Attas luggage in has never been named ?
rumour has it he commited suicide soon after.
Back to top
View user's profile 
garrick92Offline
Invisible Flaneur
Joined: 29 Oct 2001
Total posts: 1346
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 16-09-2012 22:22    Post subject: Reply with quote

ted_bloody_maul wrote:
If it was LIHOP then the plot would presumably have to have included at least one team of baggage-handlers. It hardly seems plausible to extend the plot so far for so little gain - the level of risk-taking would need to have been extraordinary.


That's quite a presumption, if you don't mind me saying so.

Mind you, in conspiracy-talk, there's a lot of it about.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
kamalktkOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 05 Feb 2011
Total posts: 981
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 08-02-2013 17:13    Post subject: Reply with quote

France’s Louvre museum shut down one of its galleries Friday after a woman vandalised an iconic painting by Delacroix by writing on it with a black marker.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/08/woman-vandalises-famed-delacroix-painting-in-louvre/

So what does that have to do with 9/11?

"The 28-year-old woman was apprehended by an attendant late Thursday after scrawling “AE911? on “Liberty Leading the People”, which was on show in the Louvre’s recently-opened satellite branch in the northern former mining town of Lens.

It was not immediately clear what the slogan meant."

Actually it's pretty clear, since this is the first result of googling “AE911? is Architects and Engineers for 911 truth
http://www.ae911truth.org/
Back to top
View user's profile 
ramonmercadoOffline
Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
Total posts: 21432
Location: Dublin
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 08-02-2013 20:06    Post subject: Reply with quote

F&*$ing nutjob. I'm sickened at the idea of that inspirational painting being vandalised.
Back to top
View user's profile 
rynner2Offline
What a Cad!
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Total posts: 26164
Location: Under the moon
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 26-04-2013 21:50    Post subject: Reply with quote

New York police find 'part of 9/11 plane landing gear'

New York Police have found part of the landing gear of what is believed to be one of jets flown into the World Trade Center on 11 September 2001.
The five-foot piece of metal, including a clearly visible Boeing identification number, was found wedged between two New York City buildings, police said.
It was found on Wednesday by surveyors inspecting a lower Manhattan building.

Nearly 3,000 people died in the terror attacks as planes were brought down in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.
Five suspected al-Qaeda militants are awaiting trial for the attacks at a military tribunal at the US detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The New York Police Department has secured the area behind 51 Park Place and 50 Murray Street as a crime scene.
The location is at the site where a mosque and community centre has been proposed, three streets away from "Ground Zero" - the site of the twin towers.

Police have taken photographs and are keeping it off-limits until a health assessment has been made by the medical examiner's office.
After that, NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne said "a decision will be made concerning sifting the soil for possible human remains". Shocked

NYPD said the landing gear was found after surveyors hired by the property owner inspecting the rear of 51 Park Place called police on Wednesday.
Analysts suggest a full exploration of the site may require some demolition work on the two buildings.

At 08:46 on 11 September 2001, American Airlines flight 11 hit the World Trade Center's north tower. Seventeen minutes later, United Flight 175 hit the south tower.
Although rubble from the attack was cleared in 2002, other debris has been found scattered across the local areas in the years since.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is accused of masterminding the attacks while the other four men being held at Guantanamo Bay are implicated for providing support for the co-ordinated hijacking.
They are charged with conspiring with al-Qaeda, terrorism, and one count of murder for each known victim of the 11 September attacks at the time the charges were filed - 2,976 in total.
The five face a possible death penalty sentence if convicted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22319253
Back to top
View user's profile 
sherbetbizarreOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Total posts: 1813
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 21-06-2013 23:39    Post subject: Reply with quote

CONSPIRACY THEORY CORNER: TOP FIVE 9/11 FREUDIAN SLIPS!

Collection of "meaningless slips of the tongue", or something more sinister..? Mostly by Bush, of course.

http://dangerousminds.net/comments/top_five_9_11_freudian_slips
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
ramonmercadoOffline
Psycho Punk
Joined: 19 Aug 2003
Total posts: 21432
Location: Dublin
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 27-11-2013 11:35    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Noam Chomsky slams 9/11 truthers (VIDEO)
Published time: November 26, 2013 19:21 Get short URL
http://rt.com/usa/noam-chomsky-911-truthers-342/

U.S. linguist and philosopher Noam Chomsky.(Reuters / Jorge Dan)U.S. linguist and philosopher Noam Chomsky.(Reuters / Jorge Dan)

MIT professor Noam Chomsky may not know exactly how or why World Trade Center 7 collapsed on September 11, 2001, but the one thing he’s sure of is that there’s no federal conspiracy behind it.

Speaking at the University of Florida a few weeks ago, Chomsky – a well-known and often outspoken scholar and political commentator – was asked by “9/11 truther” Bob Tuskin if he was ready to join activists in their belief that the government played a hand in the destruction of WTC 7, also known as Building 7, and that its role was covered up by the media.

Tuskin pointed to a group of construction experts who claim Building 7 was destroyed by a controlled demolition, but Chomsky dismissed the assertion. He acknowledged that “a minuscule number of architects and engineers” agree on this issue, but said they’re not doing what scientists should do after making a new discovery.

“What you do when you think you’ve discovered something is write articles in scientific journals, give talks at the professional societies, go to the civil engineering department at MIT or Florida or wherever you are, and present your results, then proceed to try to convince the national academies, the professional society of physicists and civil engineers, the departments of the major universities, convince them that you’ve discovered something,” he said, according to Raw Story.



“There happen to be a lot of people around who spend an hour on the internet and think they know a lot physics, but it doesn’t work like that,” he added, taking a jab at conspiracy theorists. “There’s a reason there are graduate schools in these departments.”

Chomsky also said that publishing an article in an academic journal was one of the least risky things an individual could do, rejecting claims that 9/11 truthers have refrained from doing so due to fear of the government.

Building 7 collapsed several hours after the twin towers (WTC 1 and 2) did in 2001. It wasn’t struck by an airplane, but a study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology found that the combination of structural damage by intense fires and debris from the collapse of the twin towers ultimately resulted in the building’s downfall.

Critics of this explanation believe that heat could not have caused enough damage to topple Building 7, and that explosives were placed throughout the building and detonated.

During his explanation, Chomsky also dismissed claims that the government was responsible for bringing the towers down.

“There is just overwhelming evidence that the Bush administration wasn’t involved,” he said. “Very elementary evidence. You don’t have to be a physicist to understand it. You just have to think for a minute.”

Chomsky said that even though the Bush administration clearly wanted to invade Iraq, it blamed 9/11 on Saudi hijackers. He said it could have easily blamed the attacks on Iraqi hijackers instead of presenting claims about Al- Qaeda connections to Saddam Hussein and Iraq amassing weapons of mass destruction.

Chomsky first entered the public sphere in the late 1960s with his criticism of U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. He has since made waves for criticizing American foreign policy and other western governments as he did the Soviet Union. He has equated interventionist policies by the U.S. with terrorism, and has called U.S. presidents “guilty of horrendous terrorist acts.” He also said that the diplomatic cables leaked to WikiLeaks in 2010 revealed a “profound hatred for democracy on the part of our political leadership.”
Back to top
View user's profile 
kamalktkOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 05 Feb 2011
Total posts: 981
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 03-02-2014 19:35    Post subject: Reply with quote

"9/11 truther: How I sneaked into Super Bowl XLVIII -- and hijacked the postgame show"
http://www.nj.com/super-bowl/index.ssf/2014/02/super_bowl_2014_911_truther_says_he_snuck_into_metlefe_stadium.html

to paraphrase from elsewhere:
"His presence there actually kind of debunks his own theory, as it shows how easily a place with more security than any of the 9/11 staging grounds was compromised by a total dumbass with no planning. The 9/11 hijackers spent years training for that"
Back to top
View user's profile 
sherbetbizarreOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Total posts: 1813
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 20-05-2014 12:00    Post subject: Reply with quote

John Lear at it again...
Quote:
Ex-CIA Pilot Gives Sworn Testimony That No Planes Hit The Twin Towers
US Will Have To Rebut Or Accept Statement As Truth

A former CIA and civilian pilot has sworn an affidavit, stating that no planes flew into the Twin Towers as it would have been physically impossible.

John Lear, the son of Learjet inventor, Bill Lear, has given his expert evidence that it would have been physically impossible for Boeing 767s, like Flights AA11 and UA175 to have hit the Twin Towers on 9/11, particularly when flown by inexperienced pilots:

‘No Boeing 767 airliners hit the Twin Towers as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors’, he stated in the affidavit.

Such crashes did not occur because they are physically impossible as depicted, for the following reasons: in the case of UAL 175 going into the south tower, a real Boeing 767 would have begun 'telescoping' when the nose hit the 14 inch steel columns which are 39 inches on center.

‘The vertical and horizontal tail would have instantaneously separated from the aircraft, hit the steel box columns and fallen to the ground.

‘The engines when impacting the steel columns would havemaintained their general shape and either fallen to the ground or been recovered in the debris of the collapsed building.

‘No Boeing 767 could attain a speed of 540 mph at 1000 feet above sea level ‘parasite drag doubles with velocity’ and ‘parasite power’ cubes with velocity.

The fan portion of the engine is not designed to accept the volume of dense air at that altitude and speed.

The piece of alleged external fuselage containing 3 or 4 window cutouts is inconsistent with an airplane that hit 14 inch steel box columns, placed at over 500 mph. It would have crumpled.

No significant part of the Boeing 767 or engine could have penetrated the 14 inch steel columns and 37 feet beyond the massive core of the tower without part of it falling to the ground.

‘The debris of the collapse should have contained massive sections of the Boeing 767, including 3 engine cores weighing approximately 9000 pounds apiece which could not have been hidden. Yet there is no evidence of any of these massive structural components from either 767 at the WTC. Such complete disappearance of 767s is impossible.

The affidavit, dated 28th January 2014 is part of a law suit being pursued by Morgan Reynolds in the United States District Court, Southern District, New York.

In March 2007, Reynolds, a former chief economist under the George W Bush administration filed a Request For Correction with the US National Institute of Science and Technology citing his belief that real commercial jets (Boeings) did not hit the WTC towers.

Although the 9/11 Truth movement initially rejected the ‘no-planes’ theory as too outlandish, after scientific and rational analysis, it has become a widely accepted explanation of the evidence collected.

Unlike any other form of statement, an affidavit becomes truth in law, if it is not rebutted. It will now be up to critics of the theory to present their evidence and analysis to rebut the statement point by point. If they do not – or cannot – then the US government will by ommisssion be allowing that the account given by the 9/11 Commission is wrong.

More at:
http://neonnettle.com/news/211-ex-cia-pilot-gives-sworn-testimony-that-no-planes-hit-the-twin-towers
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
EponastillOffline
Great Old One
Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Total posts: 238
Gender: Female
PostPosted: 22-07-2014 16:11    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well Sherbet. That's very interesting. It sounds totally crazy, it goes without saying. But I'm in the Conspiracy Forum here, so I'm giving it a go. I've just watched the first 15 minutes of that 'September Clues' video, on youtube. And although I find the stuff about 'the tip of the nose' a bit dubious - there's definitely something weird going on with the various news footage.

Namely, that much of it does seem to be taken from the same angle, because the size and angles of the building do match in several of the films. But they're not quite the same because the planes come in at different levels. So it can't be that actual same piece of film, being used simultaneously by different companies, because they are different, they appear to be shot from the same angle and from a different angle.

The implication (as drawn on the video) is that all the films would have to be shot from the same direction? Which seems a bit unlikely doesn't it. Why would they be? I suppose they could all have been shot from different floors of a tall building (although that seems a tad coincidental). Tis a bit weird really.

Even if you acknowlege there could be a different perspective created by zooms or something, it's rather hard to see why certain angles would be very much the same (such as the shape of the top of the tower, which is the same in all the shots).

(watching further does make you think it's all rather crazy, because how many people in the city saw those planes. Surely a lot of them. Surely it'd be very obvious in no time at all if no-one you knew had seen a plane.)

But I think it doesn't hurt to be a little cynical about the subject in general, particularly as the US and UK then used it as justification for various anti=terrorist changes in legislation, not to mention warmongering. There is room to look for conspiracy even if you acknowlege terrorism and that many people died.

If it is true, the way the person shrieking (at 30.05) is apparently the same noise in two apparently unrelated videos, shot from entirely different places = well that certainly deserves closer thought. Maybe one 'waagh!' is like another. Or maybe not.
Back to top
View user's profile 
MythopoeikaOffline
Joined: 18 Sep 2001
Total posts: 9663
Gender: Unknown
PostPosted: 22-07-2014 18:49    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eponastill wrote:
If it is true, the way the person shrieking (at 30.05) is apparently the same noise in two apparently unrelated videos, shot from entirely different places = well that certainly deserves closer thought. Maybe one 'waagh!' is like another. Or maybe not.


Like a Wilhelm Scream? Weird.
Back to top
View user's profile 
SameOldVardoger
Great Old One
Location: Scandinavia
Gender: Male
PostPosted: 22-07-2014 20:00    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agree those screams sounds suspicious. They should be looked at with some equipment to see if they really are the same.
Back to top
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fortean Times Message Board Forum Index -> Conspiracy - The War on Terror All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 79, 80, 81  Next
Page 80 of 81

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group