|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2013 2:20:19 GMT -5
i do think the pentagon was hit by the jet as told
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 21, 2013 5:47:26 GMT -5
Oh but it does, commercial airliners are actually easier to fly in the air, they have the thrust of jet engines and yaw dampeners reducing the chances of adverse yaw (thus rudder control is rarely needed) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaw_damper and fly by wire controls. I know this because one of my friends from the gliding club used to pilot jets including 747's until last year, he still flies our tug. In fact flying a glider in tow with a tug plane is harder than crashing an airliner into a building, as we don't have yaw dampers and we have to use our feet in coordinated movements with stick, airliners don't need to worry about that. What makes airline pilots the cut above the rest of us is their ability to fly and navigate, enter circuit and land on instruments alone. I cannot do that, I've tried IFR flying on sim and failed. But I am quite capable of the kamikaze type of flying performed by the hijackers. I've done it on FSX and X-Plane10, it was easy and flight sims are harder than flying real planes, Condor for example is harder than flying a K13 or K21. But anyway it was a clear day, visibility was greater than a hundred miles. They had no difficulties at all once they'd hijacked those planes, there was nothing to stop them. Buy x-plane10, it's the most advanced commercially available flight simulator around, it simulates the airflow around the wings, try it yourself, or if you have an old computer that's capable of running ms flight sim 98 get a joystick and rudder pedals compare flying light aircraft (which need rudder input from your feet) to jets (which don't) and try to copy the flying of the hijackers. It's easy.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 21, 2013 8:41:45 GMT -5
Sorry you can tell me any story you want about "child's play" and you are not only a major story teller but you are also an anonymous poster and the real pilots who contradict you are not anonymous. So your opinion has very little if any value to me other than it's an amusing fairy tale at best.
Furthermore, logic has it that amateurs with only a little bit of experience flying a single engine aircraft would not be able to fly a large commercial airliner around for a significant period of time without the help of ground control and find the location of the towers and hit them almost dead on at near break up speed. This is much more improbable for the Pentagon where the alleged flight path was a precise corkscrew descent also at near break up speed and a precise hit at ground level. Real pilots have said that these maneuvers would be extremely difficult for a seasoned pilot of a commercial airliner. And there were 3 precise strikes, not just one lucky one.
So I don't know what really happened and I can only guess and in my opinion, it sounds a lot like these aircraft were remote controlled. But that is not to say that I'm right, it's only a guess. And that is why only a REAL investigation might uncover the truth. Certainly, the official story makes very little sense as it is so extremely improbable as to be beyond belief for anyone with any reasonable amount of intelligence. It does work for those who are easily duped though.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 21, 2013 16:18:00 GMT -5
Sorry you can tell me any story you want about "child's play" Buy a simulator, try it. They didn't it was a clear day 100+ mile visibility. The twin towers stuck out like a sore thumb the time between the hijackings and the crashes was not long. Bollox, VFR: EASY. Visibilty of 100+ miles. EASY I've been up in a glider 100+ miles away from the power stations that supply Nottingham, and seen them clear as day, if you like I'll take a photo of the Trent power stations sometime, you'll have to wait though this weekend I'm off to Bristol to a cider fest with friends. Velocity Never Exceed applies to people who care about living. Kamikaze pilots don't care about it and the hijackers may well have taken the planes through VNE. EASY ABSOLUTELY EASY. I may not be able to land a 757, but if I were a hijacker, I could bloody well crash one into a building as big as the Pentagon. 19 men hijacked planes and crashed them. It's not difficult to work out. They weren't, you're wrong. You aren't. Based on misinformation. Real investigations DID, 19 men hijacked planes and murdered people, it's that simple. The conspiracy theorists make very little sense as they're so extremely improbable as to be beyond belief for anyone with any reasonable amount of intelligence. It does work for those who are easily duped (like you) though.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 21, 2013 17:45:21 GMT -5
Thanks but I don't need a simulator. In fact I read an account a couple of years ago, from a trained commercial pilot who said he used a simulator to try to hit the Pentagon at the same velocity and trajectory as the plane that actually hit the Pentagon and managed to get a direct hit one out of 10 tries.
As to the rest of your point, you're deliberately missing my point, that you are basically a nobody with zero credibility because you've been caught in many lies and fabrications. I read the comments from REAL pilots and they all contradict you.
You come out with what you believe or would like me to believe is "that simple" but that only works for simple minds such as yours. The events of 9/11 are NOT simple and are NOT explained away by fairy tales that work for the gullible and ignorant.
One gets a commercial pilot's license that requires a minimum of 250 hours of flying experience. Then there is another minimum requirement of 1,500 hours of flight time and other additional requirements before one can fly a commercial airliner.
If it was "that simple", then those requirements would not be necessary and pilots might as well be trained on Microsoft Flight Simulator, which BTW, is not "that simple" to master either.
So please go tell your simple stories to the simple minded, your stories are laughable at best.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 21, 2013 19:47:51 GMT -5
Hani Hanjour managed a direct hit on the pentagon in 1 out of 1 tries. Case closed.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 21, 2013 20:01:35 GMT -5
Hani Hanjour managed a direct hit on the pentagon in 1 out of 1 tries. Case closed. For you, I'm not that ignorant or gullible and apparently, neither are REAL pilots or anyone else with any reasonable amount of intelligence. Hanjour couldn't fly a paper airplane even according to the official story. But you bought it and you're convinced so it works for you. The question is, why are you trying so hard to convince me?
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 22, 2013 5:07:17 GMT -5
Hani Hanjour held a commercial pilot's licence so obviously he could. And crashing is easier than landing or IFR flight.
Eyewitnesses saw an American Airlines jet,
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 22, 2013 7:56:08 GMT -5
I made my case as far as I'm concerned. There's much more to it than what I've posted in this forum so far and I did provide numerous links to what real experts have uncovered. Some of the key points to consider when one examines the issues are:
1. The facts. Numerous facts have been uncovered since 9/11. The vast majority has never been published in the lamestream media. Some however, did leak out, especially the numerous lies by Bush and those in the Bush administration. Other facts are available from many other sources.
2. The credibility of government, its hired agencies, actors and its puppet media.
3. The credibility of the many experts who have challenged government's account. I provided links to several sites that contains information from many, many different people of all types. Some of these people are very well known. They include architects, engineers, chemists, metallurgists, controlled demolition experts, pilots, firefighters, current and former government insiders including intelligence, high ranking armed forces persons, 9/11 survivors and family members, etc.
4. One's own common sense.
For #4, one would have to have an objective and open mind. In other words, if one starts with the premise that elements in government could have never possibly committed or helped commit an act such as 9/11 then there is no objectivity or open mind.
In your case, you and your credibility are irrelevant. You are nothing more than an anonymous poster who has been caught in numerous lies, fabrications and outrageous claims. I don't know what your actual agenda is but I'm sure you have at least enough intelligence to have figured out by now that you haven't convinced me in the least bit. So I'll repeat the question, since maybe you missed it the first time. If you don't want to answer it, I'll take your non-answer as an answer in itself.
Why are you trying so hard to convince me?
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 22, 2013 10:30:48 GMT -5
1) 19 Mujahideen hijacked planes and crashed them. 2) Your government is leakier than a colander, they couldn't pull something like this off. 3) No expert's have challenged your government's account, only charlatans and frauds pretending to be experts. Architects are not experts engineers are only experts if they're construction / structural fire engineers / demolitions experts. Any pilots (John Lear for example) who say that Hani Hanjour wasn't capable of crashing a plane into a building are frankly nuts. Firefighters who were there, such as Lt Frank Papalia and Fire Chief Daniel Nigro who ordered the evacuation of the area around building 7 have testified that the building was severely damaged, burning badly and was expected to collapse.
4) Common sense says that when three buildings are hit by aeroplanes, and the structure around the impact points collapses, the aeroplane and the fires started by the aeroplanes crashing into the building were the cause of collapse. Common sense says that when a building is hit by the debris of two burning buildings that collapsed due to structural damage and fire, which also collapses after suffering structural damage and fire, collapsed because of structural damage and fire.
Why am I trying so hard to convince you ? Because you seek the truth and I am telling you the truth, unlike the liars of A&E911'truth' Steven Jones, Dylan Avery, James Fetzer, Judy Wood & Kevin Ryan who want to sell you snake oil.
While you obsess on the crimes the government didn't do, the crimes they did do are being ignored by you, and your ridiculous position as a conspiracy theorist undermines the threat from you doing anything to them should you come across a crime they did do.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 22, 2013 10:58:29 GMT -5
"Why am I trying so hard to convince you ? Because you seek the truth and I am telling you the truth"
Except that besides that you're a nobody, I already exposed you as a liar and fabricator on several occasions. So what makes you believe I take anything you post as truth? Are you on some kind of rabid crusade?
"While you obsess on the crimes the government didn't do, the crimes they did do are being ignored by you"
And which crimes would those be that you believe I ignore?
"your ridiculous position as a conspiracy theorist"
Unlike you, I'm not a "conspiracy theorist". Unlike you, I haven't swallowed government's conspiracy theory as you did 100% (as you yourself admitted). I posted many times that I'm not interested in theories about 9/11, just the facts and the truth. And you even confirmed that with your answer above but now contradict yourself. If you believe my position as a truth seeker is "ridiculous" then that in itself says a lot about you and your character.
However, you constantly lie, fabricate, make incredible unsupported claims, attack those who question government's conspiracy theory, often with name calling and contradict yourself. So what possible truth would you believe I might ever find credible from you? Your sense of logic is non-existent.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 22, 2013 11:31:09 GMT -5
What lies ? What fabrications ? Is it not the case that in fire steel will weaken ? Is it not the case that the WTC's were structurally damaged and on fire ? Is it not the case that the WTC's collapsed after being structurally damaged and on fire ?
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 22, 2013 12:15:17 GMT -5
"What lies ? What fabrications ?"
All the ones I caught you with, see one example below. Go back and read them if you care to.
"While you obsess on the crimes the government didn't do, the crimes they did do are being ignored by you"
And which crimes would those be that you believe I ignore?
You have a habit of throwing s**t against the wall and hoping it sticks but when questioned on them, you simply ignore the questions.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 23, 2013 6:06:15 GMT -5
Examples: Your government spies on it's neighbours and allies and has used signals intelligence to undermine trade deals from it's allies to aid American Military Contractors. The method is ECHELON. The stations at Menwith Hill & GCHQ Bude were used in the 1990's to undermine a deal between Vickers PLC and Kuwait. Fax and telephone correspondence were intercepted. Information was passed to General Dynamics and used to make their bid more attractive, as a result the Kuwaitis bought gas turbine powered M1 Abrams tanks (prone to breakdown in sandy conditions) instead of the better diesel powered Challenger 2 Vickers tank.
Your government operates an airbase in the Chagos islands (British Indian Ocean Territory) the natives of those islands were displaced by our respective governments.
Extraordinary rendition and torture were carried out on behalf of the USA during the early years of the war in Afghanistan (and during the Iraq war).
Whistleblower Private Bradley Manning's leaks.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 23, 2013 10:37:24 GMT -5
Examples: Your government spies on it's neighbours and allies and has used signals intelligence to undermine trade deals from it's allies to aid American Military Contractors. The method is ECHELON. The stations at Menwith Hill & GCHQ Bude were used in the 1990's to undermine a deal between Vickers PLC and Kuwait. Fax and telephone correspondence were intercepted. Information was passed to General Dynamics and used to make their bid more attractive, as a result the Kuwaitis bought gas turbine powered M1 Abrams tanks (prone to breakdown in sandy conditions) instead of the better diesel powered Challenger 2 Vickers tank. Your government operates an airbase in the Chagos islands (British Indian Ocean Territory) the natives of those islands were displaced by our respective governments. Extraordinary rendition and torture were carried out on behalf of the USA during the early years of the war in Afghanistan (and during the Iraq war). Whistleblower Private Bradley Manning's leaks. I haven't ignored anything. Some of those crimes I'm not fully aware of (I heard of Echelon but have not studied it in full) but that doesn't mean I'm surprised that these crimes have been committed. Others you mentioned I have posted quite a bit on, especially torture, rendition, other war crimes and crimes against humanity, Bradley Manning, Julian Assange, WikiLeaks, the "collateral murder" video, Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, etc. All you need to do is go through all my posts in this forum and you should be able to find them.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 23, 2013 11:50:18 GMT -5
Make a big deal of the real issues then instead of unsubstantiated 9/11 conspiracy theory rubbish.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 23, 2013 12:44:15 GMT -5
Make a big deal of the real issues then instead of unsubstantiated 9/11 conspiracy theory rubbish. I make a big deal of all real issues that I want to make a big deal of, including unsubstantiated conspiracy theory rubbish peddled as truth by this government. What I do or don't do however, is my prerogative, I don't need direction from you. Are you worried that much that I don't agree with you so you want to try to silence me? "I started this thread because 9/11 was the most significant event of our lifetimes and the subject needs to be kept alive because government and its puppet media are not willing to tell us the truth about 9/11. They will not tell us the truth because almost all of government's agenda is based on government's version of what happened and if the truth is not what we're told, then its agenda would be akin to the "emperor's new clothes".
We do know that the lies and deceptions about 9/11 are so flagrant that the truth exposes gross criminal fraud. That fraud has led to the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, including Americans and the complete decimation of all the protections guaranteed by our Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights." - Bob aibafs.freeforums.net/index.cgi?board=conspiracies&action=display&thread=46&page=1
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 24, 2013 11:27:47 GMT -5
No it's not the most significant event of our lifetimes. There's a civil war in Syria that's killed over 70000 people, genocide occurred in Rwanda 19 years ago, 22 years ago a civil war broke out in Somalia that is still raging despite the intervention of the UN. What you call 9/11, was just a coordinated terrorist attack. Largest casualty rate of any terrorist attack but pretty unsophisticated in it's execution.
The reasons why your country was attacked were set out in Osama Bin Laden's fatwa prior to the embassy bombings and the attack on the USS Cole.
Osama Bin Laden's Mujahideen are the ones who attacked your country. The attack was simple, easy to carry out, difficult to stop. And it happened in response to your government's middle east policies, it's use of bases in Saudi Arabia, policies towards Iraq and your government's support of Israel. He specifically referred to the USA and allies as a Zionist/Crusader alliance. He was an extremely wealthy man, he paid for four of his men's flight training, they went solo (that means they flew navigated and landed on their own with nobody else in the planes), they passed the tests required to get a commercial pilots licence, they held commercial pilots licences, they had trained on official Boeing 737 simulators which sit on hydraulic rams and feature a full replica cockpit of the 737. Whilst there may be some differences in cockpit layout the basics: Flight Yoke (pitch and roll control), Throttle (engine thrust), Trim (this balances the aircraft), Rudder Pedals (yaw) would have been absolutely familiar, not only that they were able to disable the locational transponders making it harder for them to be seen amid thousands of flights.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 24, 2013 11:39:40 GMT -5
"it's not the most significant event of our lifetimes."
To each his own, most Americans believe otherwise. The rest of your post, actually all of it, is just opinion, reality is another story.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 24, 2013 11:47:01 GMT -5
If you were in Syria you wouldn't really care about 9/11 you'd care about what the Insurgents and the Syrian Army are doing to each other and to the civilians caught in between.
9/11 was just a terrorist attack. War is far more deadly.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 24, 2013 12:13:38 GMT -5
"If you were in Syria you wouldn't really care about 9/11 you'd care about what the Insurgents and the Syrian Army are doing to each other and to the civilians caught in between."
I'm not in Syria so I can't speak for any Syrian.
"9/11 was just a terrorist attack. War is far more deadly."
True, however, all the illegal wars and other war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by the US government since 9/11 were waged under pretext of 9/11. So 9/11 was the catalyst for the massacre of perhaps as many as a million+ innocent people and certainly the misery of over one million survivors and their loved ones as well as the decimation of the infrastructure at least 2 nations. So it's critical that the truth about 9/11 is known since the entity that sold the world its version of the story about 9/11 is the very same one that has and still commits these atrocities.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 24, 2013 16:44:16 GMT -5
Iraq was waged under the pretext that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that could be deployed within 45 minutes. The Al Qaeda terrorist attacks against your country from 1998 - 2001 actually undermined the case for war against Iraq as the terrorist Osama Bin Laden whose followers attacked New York and Washington was in Afghanistan. Remember Clinton's use of cruise missiles against Sudan and Afghanistan in 98 ? 9/11 was Bin Laden's work, he had the means and the motive and he admitted being behind it.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 24, 2013 17:11:07 GMT -5
"9/11 was Bin Laden's work, he had the means and the motive and he admitted being behind it."
I though Khalid Sheikh Muhammad was the mastermind of 9/11? He confessed to doing everything from A to Z after being tortured mercilessly in order to make him confess to everything from A to Z. Government has difficulty keeping their stories straight.
As for Bin Laden, I understand there are at least 2 videos out there where he says he didn't do it. There are a lot of videos out there. The FBI said they didn't want Bin Laden for 9/11.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 24, 2013 18:47:53 GMT -5
Khalid Sheikh Muhammed worked for Osama Bin Laden and masterminded it but who bankrolled their pilot training ? Osama Bin Laden.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 24, 2013 19:15:48 GMT -5
Khalid Sheikh Muhammed worked for Osama Bin Laden and masterminded it but who bankrolled their pilot training ? Osama Bin Laden. And you were there or is that what you were told?
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 25, 2013 4:32:33 GMT -5
Were you there ?
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 25, 2013 7:44:16 GMT -5
No, that's why unlike you, I want to know what happened, I don't just accept lies and fabrications as truth. Unlike you, I don't make wild unsubstantiated statements and try to peddle them as fact. Unlike you, I don't regurgitate government's conspiracy theory and pretend it's all 100% accurate. And unlike you, I pay attention to both sides of the story and don't dismiss one side because I don't agree with it. And unlike you, I have a lot of respect for those experts who have actually done the research and written a host of papers and created videos on the subject, many of whom I hold as highly credible.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 25, 2013 7:56:33 GMT -5
I wanted to know what happened, I did a lot of research of my own. I've seen no evidence that an A3 Skywarrior or Global Hawk or Cruise Missile were used against the Pentagon.
I've seen no evidence to suggest that anything other than structural damage and fire could have brought down the twin towers in the manner that they collapsed. I've seen evidence that WTC7 was heavily damaged and on fire. I've seen enough evidence that steel weakens in fire and can structurally fail as a load bearing member.
These are factors that pretend experts like the Architect Richard Gage wish to ignore. It's telling that the American Institute of Architects wants nothing to do with Richard Gage's conspiracy theories.
|
|
|
Post by bob0627 on Mar 25, 2013 8:32:44 GMT -5
"I've seen no evidence that an A3 Skywarrior or Global Hawk or Cruise Missile were used against the Pentagon."
I didn't see a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon on any video, I didn't see any evidence that there was enough debris to reconstruct a commercial airliner as they do with ALL airplane crashes (which was never done) when the debris can be recovered and I see a ton of evidence that the majority of the evidence has been destroyed and/or withheld and deliberately concealed from the public. That's called a cover up. It doesn't mean that a commercial airliner did not hit the Pentagon, it just makes EVERYTHING suspect.
"I've seen no evidence to suggest that anything other than structural damage and fire could have brought down the twin towers in the manner that they collapsed."
That's your opinion and belief. Experts have seen no evidence to suggest that planes, fires or both cause the collapse of 3 towers in the manner they collapsed and I agree with their findings.
"These are factors that pretend experts like the Architect Richard Gage wish to ignore."
That's your opinion and as usual another attack against those you disagree with. If you knew anything about Gage's research, you would know that everything he says starts with the government's conspiracy theory. So he actually does take everything into account. And thousands of other experts agree with him and signed their names in agreement and they are NOT anonymous.
"It's telling that the American Institute of Architects wants nothing to do with Richard Gage's conspiracy theories."
A lot of entities, including the lamestream media, most in government and their paid stooges and many others don't want to have anything to do with anything that contradicts the official conspiracy theory. There are many reasons for that.
|
|
|
Post by shred on Mar 27, 2013 8:37:15 GMT -5
Er, most of the debris was inside the pentagon. Security cameras weren't designed with the kind of frame rate to spot fast moving hijacked airliners. Eyewitness Mike Walter saw and identified an American Airlines Jet. American Airlines confirmed that the jet which hit the Pentagon was one of theirs, Boeing 757-223 N644AA : This is the hole it made in the front of the Pentagon when it struck at the speed of 458 knots (528mph) : All 64 people in the plane and 125 people on the ground were killed. The people who cleaned up the debris and rebuilt the Pentagon saw plenty of debris from a Boeing 757 along with pieces of human remains. Firefighters who fought the fires saw plenty of evidence that the debris was from an American Airlines jet. They'd all have to be pretty sick if they were involved in covering up a conspiracy.
|
|