View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby ProfWag » 02 Jan 2015, 01:03

SydneyPSIder wrote:
ProfWag wrote:You no plane conspiracy theorists are just sick, heartless, and ignorant on the calamity of what you propose.

And yet it fits the actual totality of evidence much more closely than any other explanation. It is not palatable, and it opens up a lot of cans of worms. Wanting to feel comfortable is no excuse for not facing up to reality, and the sickness and heartlessness is not in the people who are uncovering these painful truths.

Nothing in the official account makes sense once you scrutinise it. And there are networks of ownership and leasing and influence that point to an inside job.


You are even more full of sh!t if you think the evidence points to anything other than terrorists flying planes into buildings. Do you really think that makes me feel comfortable?
Again, you 9/11 conspiracy theorists are just "plane" sick, heartless and ignorant.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54






Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby SydneyPSIder » 03 Jan 2015, 05:03

ProfWag wrote:
SydneyPSIder wrote:
ProfWag wrote:You no plane conspiracy theorists are just sick, heartless, and ignorant on the calamity of what you propose.


And yet it fits the actual totality of evidence much more closely than any other explanation. It is not palatable, and it opens up a lot of cans of worms. Wanting to feel comfortable is no excuse for not facing up to reality, and the sickness and heartlessness is not in the people who are uncovering these painful truths.

Nothing in the official account makes sense once you scrutinise it. And there are networks of ownership and leasing and influence that point to an inside job.


You are even more full of sh!t if you think the evidence points to anything other than terrorists flying planes into buildings. Do you really think that makes me feel comfortable?
Again, you 9/11 conspiracy theorists are just "plane" sick, heartless and ignorant.


whoah, you're really in disinfo mode today, wag.

there's no way on god's green earth when you look at the details of 9/11 that the events occurred as per the official narrative. it's not possible in physics or engineering or aeronautics for starters. then there are all the mistakes that were made and the coverups in disposing of the evidence and gagging first responders.

the more experienced and honest pilots appear on youtube saying the stunts were impossible, the more wag blusters and carries on in his best paid disinfo mode...
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby Scepcop » 03 Jan 2015, 06:08

SydneyPSIder wrote:Relatively little loss of life. Why? I'm glad you asked:

Scenario 1 - "compassionate "

- most or all pax on planes were fake identities, possibly adapted from spooks and their complicit spook families, a la Newtown; no hijackers and no planes as already noted
- many of the floors in the WTC had been rented within 1 year prior to 9/11, having been vacant for the entire previous 26 years of the buildings life, e.g. suddenly the BoA took out 5 whole floors. This was in a troubled, asbestos-ridden old building that needed over a billion dollars worth of asbestos removal work, floor by floor, to meet current standards. In actual fact, it seems certain businesses had been encouraged to rent and move their 'troublesome ' records into the WTC in order to have them conveniently destroyed, as per the Pentagon impact. And BoA has a lot to hide. Now it's possible there were virtually no staff in the buildings for these lettings, as they only needed to have the appearance of tenants, and the businesses were in on it to boot. So remove a few names from the 3,000 list as they may have furnished fake names of non-existent workers
- I believe quite a lot of ordinary uninvolved workers escaped after the first explosions via the usual means, and the planners expected that to happen, also reducing casualties.
- now this is the big one - I believe a lot of the 3,000 identities were simply fictitious and fabricated names. The scam here was that the US govt kindly paid $500,000 compensation to each family for each death, a tidy and generous sum. Let's say as many as 2,000 names were just generated as fictions. The govt would have then paid or allocated $1bn to these fictitious identities - money which would actually be used to pay off everyone involved in the plan handsomely, plus covering all operating costs in arrears. I believe this payout was planned as part of the exercise.
- a handful of auditors at the Pentagon were killed, but there were no pax as already discussed.

So the body count may have been well under 1,000 in actual fact.


Excellent analysis. Plus consider this. From the viewpoint of the perpetrators, it would be a lot easier to fake the event with actors and fake footage or holograms (if they have the technology) than it would be to do it with real victims and real planes.

As to the remote controlled jet theory, the problem with that is that even with a remote controlled jet, it would still be hard to hit the towers with complete accuracy. If they missed, the jets would have to circle around and try again, perhaps several times, which would look suspicious and risky because there's a chance they could miss and crash. If they crashed, the people around would see that it was an empty unmanned plane, and they could not control where it crashed too, so they could not set up the eyewitnesses. So you see, there are too many problems with that. Much easier to use a holographic plane or faked video CGI footage.

It's also much easier to use actors and fake victims than it is to deal with the consequences and cost of real victims, which are more unpredictable and uncontrollable. Real victims will take you to court and cause a lot more trouble than actors and fake victims would.

Some 9/11 researchers have also said that most of the 3,000 victims do NOT appear in the Social Security Death Index online, which is usually 100 percent accurate. That is a huge SMOKING GUN. Also, some of the alleged victims turned out to be people who died long before 9/11, which is another smoking gun proof of fraud. Further, many of the alleged victim's families only have one or two photos of their deceased loved ones who died on 9/11, which is odd and unusual.

Here is an interview with Markus Allen on HigherSideChat about how 9/11 could have been scripted and faked.

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby Scepcop » 03 Jan 2015, 06:15

ProfWag wrote:
SydneyPSIder wrote:
ProfWag wrote:You no plane conspiracy theorists are just sick, heartless, and ignorant on the calamity of what you propose.

And yet it fits the actual totality of evidence much more closely than any other explanation. It is not palatable, and it opens up a lot of cans of worms. Wanting to feel comfortable is no excuse for not facing up to reality, and the sickness and heartlessness is not in the people who are uncovering these painful truths.

Nothing in the official account makes sense once you scrutinise it. And there are networks of ownership and leasing and influence that point to an inside job.


You are even more full of sh!t if you think the evidence points to anything other than terrorists flying planes into buildings. Do you really think that makes me feel comfortable?
Again, you 9/11 conspiracy theorists are just "plane" sick, heartless and ignorant.


Profwag, your one line dismissals are not evidence of anything either way, and provide NO VALUE to this discussion, other than to show how smart the truth seekers here are, compared to someone with no ability to assess evidence like yourself.

Also, many people die everyday from illness, disease, car accidents, etc. Why you so specifically hung up on the 3,000 that allegedly died on 9/11? Why are they so special compared to the rest? In fact, 40,000 people die each day from starvation. Why aren't you emotionally hung up about that too?

Answer: Most likely, because you are not emotionally hung up on those victims in reality. You are merely pretending to be in order to have an excuse to spew ad hominem attacks on others who are honest enough to admit that the evidence does NOT support the official story of 9/11.

You've just been OWNED!
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby Scepcop » 03 Jan 2015, 07:04

“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby ProfWag » 03 Jan 2015, 23:20

Scepcop wrote:
Profwag, your one line dismissals are not evidence of anything either way, and provide NO VALUE to this discussion, other than to show how smart the truth seekers here are, compared to someone with no ability to assess evidence like yourself.

First off, Mr. Wu, why don't you ask Sydney for evidence rather than posting random crap? He states some ridiculous numbers with no basis when in actuality, over 1,600 remains from he WTC have been identified. You have a double standard for conspiracy rather than seeking the truth.
Scepcop wrote:Also, many people die everyday from illness, disease, car accidents, etc. Why you so specifically hung up on the 3,000 that allegedly died on 9/11? Why are they so special compared to the rest? In fact, 40,000 people die each day from starvation. Why aren't you emotionally hung up about that too?

And second, you don't know me at all. Why do you think I'm NOT hung up about deaths from starvation. I contribute to a starvation charity every month in hopes of ending world hunger and have for 30 years. How about you? If you're interested, I contribute to http://www.heifer.org/
It's a damn shame that you totally support some government conspiracy when you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. There is a preponderance of evidence for a terrorist attack that is far and above what would be considered reasonable doubt and your theories required literally thousands of people to be involved in a tragedy of epic proportions--something that you consistently overlook. You and Sydney are travesties to 9/11 research and especially to the victims and families of 9/11. And yes, I will own that statement.
Enough said.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby ProfWag » 04 Jan 2015, 00:49

Scepcop wrote:Some 9/11 researchers have also said that most of the 3,000 victims do NOT appear in the Social Security Death Index online, which is usually 100 percent accurate.

Mr. Wu, please do your own research and do not make up information. If this does not clear up your concern over this subject, please let me know. Your statement "usually 100 percent accurate" is totally 100 percent inaccurate.
From the Social Security Administration, AND THIS IS IMPORTANT Winston:

The SSDI does not include death records for everyone who has been issued a Social Security Number (card). Common reasons for exclusion include the following:

The death was not reported to the Social Security Administration (SSA).
The death occurred before the Death Master File was maintained in a computer database. About 98 percent of the deaths in this database occurred between 1962 and the present.
The person did not participate in the Social Security program.
Survivor death benefits were (are) being paid to dependents or spouse.
A recent death may not be indexed yet.
Human error. (Before you give up, read the section titled "Missing Entries in the SSDI.")

Again, Winston and Syd, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do your research with an open mind!!! I beg you to do this rather than post inaccurate statements.
You are obviously not following your own signature line: “Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby SydneyPSIder » 04 Jan 2015, 17:27

In response to the alleged 1,600 sets of identified remains:

I believe these are all faked results. First, once you consider that this was an inside job with the full complicity of a sector of government, you can no longer trust anything they say on the matter. It's easy for them to say they have matched DNA, but no-one saw the lab workers do it. No-one has seen any test results. Given that very few bodies seem to be in the debris, and it was entirely pancaked and squashed to a pulp, and the bulk of the steel columns were hastily taken away to a shipyard within a few days and sold to China for scrap without a forensic or metallurgical examination (which is actually illegal and disturbing the scene of a crime), and those beams may have supposedly had bits of people stuck to them, something apparently not of concern, how would you even obtain 1,600 unique DNA samples from anything? Bits of flesh? They scraped together bits of flesh? Then how do you go about figuring out whose DNA it even was, given that you don't have the whole population's DNA on a database somewhere. So it's all BULLSHIT. The reason they took the columns away was that there would have been traces of thermite style explosives, C4 plastic explosive and very obvious high temperature shearing lines on the columns along with other explosive ruptures. It's possible they might have done some token DNA matching on any human remains from the small number of real people unfortunate enough to have been trapped and killed in the buildings, but they would rather have saved the expense, given that it was an inside job with expected collateral casualties. They couldn't have gotten any DNA results from people supposedly in the planes, because the planes and passengers did not exist in the locations they were claimed to be.

Ditto in exactly the same fashion for the non-existent subterranean plane crash in PA that left no wreckage whatsoever, where the bribed coroner claimed he had to dig the plane and its contents out from underground and did another DNA matchup of everyone. BULLSHIT. No airliner crash in history has ever disappeared from sight underground, nose to tail, and left no visible wreckage on the ground. The supposed 'gash' the plane went into was an already existing geological feature present in earlier aerial photos. So a fake crash site. It is just possible to my mind that all the pax in the 4 quarter-full flights on that day had been landed and disembarked somewhere like the Ohio airport, told there was some sort of terrorist attempt or suspicion on their plane, herded into a building, then told they would be joining another flight that would take them to their original intended destination (LA etc). Then the 4 quarter-full quotas of passengers may have gotten on to a single plane that was intended to be crashed into something else with all pax on board to get rid of the human evidence and create a body count, but the USAF legitimately scrambled and shot down the airliner as a local base command decision, as I've heard, as it was also off course and word was out about hijackings. That is just possible. This would mean the plane was shot down in the air, distributing wreckage, bodies and luggage over the same general area in Shanksville, PA, as some eyewitnesses apparently reported, if you are to believe the reports. That's a different thing to disappearing in a gash in the ground without trace as per the highly unlikely official story. Other planes were active in the area, with an F-16 fighter type plane and an A-10 Warthog style plane both identified by appearance. This may have been done honestly and inadvertently by a local base command, screwing up whatever the original plan was. Or perhaps it was orchestrated from the outset, with the 'Let's roll' script ready to go, etc. Or perhaps the vast majority of pax were invented identities or spooks and there were just no plane fatalities. As noted, the families of people supposedly on the planes have said virtually nothing after the event, not demanded enquiries, not created a ruckus, etc. Sounds very much like the families in the Newtown incident, who all had their mortgages paid off in full a year earlier on Xmas Day, and not a single one has sued the local education authority for negligence, unlike the families at Columbine -- apart from a great deal of other evidence that suggests Newtown was a fake incident.

Finally the non-existent flight that didn't hit the Pentagon. No wreckage, no bodies, no luggage, the American authorities claim the whole lot was completely and utterly incinerated in a fiery inferno (although you can see undamaged pieces of paper sitting on desks in offices exposed by the explosion in many of the photos). They also claimed DNA matching. BULLSHIT. We know an airliner didn't hit the Pentagon. I still wonder what really happened to Barbara Olson, however.

The Social Security record 'dilemma' does not really concern me at all, and simply does not matter one way or the other. It's an irrelevancy in light of the other evidence.

Finally, I don't subscribe to any hologram theory or directed energy weapon theory, because we are simply not aware of any existing developed technology in this area. You do not need non-existent hologram technology or DEW technology to pull this stunt off. Those sorts of discussions are science fiction distractions and diversions, and sometimes deliberate ones, to try to make researchers look nutty. If it turns out an existing hologram can be made in full daylight that could fool people, great, but I am not aware of any such hologram technology being in existence, although I'm happy to be corrected. A few stage tricks have been done 'resurrecting' dead music performers on stage in a holographic way, but they require a large clear screen to be set up on stage to work as a projection device.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby SydneyPSIder » 04 Jan 2015, 21:41

ProfWag wrote:It's a damn shame that you totally support some government conspiracy when you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. There is a preponderance of evidence for a terrorist attack that is far and above what would be considered reasonable doubt and your theories required literally thousands of people to be involved in a tragedy of epic proportions--something that you consistently overlook. You and Sydney are travesties to 9/11 research and especially to the victims and families of 9/11. And yes, I will own that statement.
Enough said.

haha, very funny. You say the strangest things, wag. Travesties to 9/11 research? This is the most logical set of conclusions to pick out of the '9/11 research' that has been done. You're just flinging around insults to get a reaction and try to denigrate the conclusions many people have come to via your usual illegitimate means of argumentation -- putdowns, etc. But that's always been your way. You ARE the pseudoscep's pseudoscep, and possibly a misguided intelligence irregular to boot.

Why don't you put your real name to your statement, and have it out there? An anonymous disinfo spook putting their name to a statement on the internet, wow, that's really something.

As noted, the families of the ppl supposedly on the planes haven't made much of a ruckus, whereas the legitimate victims on the ground have -- or the way MH17 families have in the present (and was MH17 accidentally shot down in a joint Thai-US military exercise with a concomitant cover-up?). That is suspicious. Ted Olson didn't even seem too upset about his supposedly dead wife, calling a radio station within 5 minutes of getting the news -- to describe an impossible phone call made from the plane which didn't have an airphone and from which mobiles wouldn't work -- to tell the world all about it quite dispassionately. Wonder if he was looking for a cheap divorce, she was wife number 2, and he went on to marry yet another blonde a mere 6 months later, no doubt after all his grieving and adjustment was over. He's certainly a part of the conspiracy to lend the whole thing legitimacy -- look, even right wingers were killed!

It was impossible to make phone calls from planes, the research has been done. The phone calls are therefore faked. There are even whispers that can be overhead on the recordings saying 'good job' and 'it's a frame'. I think I know how some of these were done. What are we to make of the authorities then presenting us with these calls to make us feel sorry and rise up in anger against an enemy they conveniently name at the same time?

Now, this notion of yours then, wag, of '9/11 research' and being a travesty to it. What sort of 9/11 research are you talking about? Only the official NIST report which is an engineering and physics impossibility full of implausible excuses? Or do you mean the usual meaning of 9/11 research which attempts to unpick what really happened and find out who the real culprits were. In which case, we are not a travesty at all, we're pretty close to the mark, and getting closer. If you mean so-called 'research' from NIST, well, that 'official' research has all been done and dusted and there is nothing to add, so there is no such thing in that definition therefore of '9/11 research', it's the past tense. Remember, the building columns were taken away within a few days without any forensic or metallurgical examination and sent for recycling to China. The truck drivers taking the beams had GPSes set up on their trucks and one was fired for taking an extra half hour for lunch to make sure all the beams were disposed of without external examination. The first responders and all associated emergency services personnel have been gagged by court order from discussing anything. Engineers and metallurgists who expressed doubts about the possibility of planes causing the collapse were even fired from their jobs.

Then there are all the other problems of WTC7 collapsing, of strange damage to WTC5 and 6, of the identities and connections of the owners and lessees of those buildings, and all the other things already discussed here amply on other threads. The hijackers were low grade patsies who had forged passports (no idea OBL was forging passports in his cave, so one set of Arabic people could pretend to be another set??? why would you bother doing that???) who could barely fly a single engined Cessna in a straight line, and we are expected to believe 5 scrawny guys, 5'6", terrorised a cabin full of larger people with tiny boxcutters that airport regulations in force at the time say they could not have brought on with them, a single one of them burst into the cockpit and killed a burly pilot and co-pilot stone cold dead and dragged out the bodies, then took over the controls of a Boeing 757 or 767 they had never flown or seen before completely covered with dials and controls, all turned off the radio transponder within 1 minute of each other without being in touch (they wouldn't even know what it was or where to find it), did a funny loop back over hundreds of miles interestingly flying over military airports in the process and going through radar dead zones that only ATCs know about, and without knowing how to use the GPSes on those planes unerringly visually steered towards NYC and hit two buildings dead centre by eye. Apparently at 500 mph although the planes can only do 250 mph at sea level without shaking apart. Ditto for an amazing 270 degree turn over the Pentagon no experienced pilot could pull off, hitting a recently reinforced section occupied only by CIA budget overspend auditors and the paper records. And they skimmed over grass with dangling engines and did no damage whatsoever, where the engines must have magically flattened to let the body of the plane hit the ground floor of the building? They not only flattened, they ceased to weigh 6 tons each and make holes where you would expect. But we'll never know, as the entire lot was entirely incinerated to powder and smoke at massive massive temperatures (while papers sit intact on desks nearby), but they still managed to get all the DNA off all passengers.

And how do you explain the USAF standdown on that day? Those were some pretty well informed Cessna flying hijackers with their ears to the ground on some pretty sensitive US military info. When planes were scrambled very late from Andrews Airbase, they were then deliberately sent on a wild goose chase out to sea to delay them even more, after which they tried to get a bead on these supposed rogue planes, whatever they really were. And all the rest of the USAF interceptors were in Alaska that day for some reason, leaving the US unprotected. Some coincidence, huh? Those hijackers knew they had the luxury of taking hours to hijack those planes, not minutes!!! Not only that, but the general in charge of the Alaskan fun and game exercises elected to continue the exercises while America was under attack! And then he was promoted shortly after that!

Who is the travesty here, profwag? Invoking the names of '9/11 families' is a pretty low act, even by your already extremely low standards on here. (But what do 'standards' matter when you're a disinfo spook?) The families on the ground keep demanding new enquiries and never get them -- and they would be very familiar by now with these premises. You are worse than a travesty, you're a disinfo spook and also clearly a craven coward. And I stand by that statement. I will even own it.

There are thousands of honest defence personnel, pilots, engineers and architects who have put their names, identities and careers on the line by voicing the same concerns. Versus one cowardly craven anonymous spook on the internet calling himself profwag who somehow just knows better.

Does anyone know anyone who was actually on those planes? The pax? Anyone? Anyone know if there was a legitimate funeral for anyone? Friend of a friend? etc. Forgetting disposing of Barbara Olson for a second. Seems like every time you meet one of these 'innocent' people, their spouses worked for the CIA or FBI or they are ex-military intelligence, or whatever.
Last edited by SydneyPSIder on 04 Jan 2015, 21:45, edited 1 time in total.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby SydneyPSIder » 04 Jan 2015, 21:41

AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77

8:20 am : Flight 77 departs from Dulles Airport. Some 20 miles from the Pentagon.

8:50 : Last radio communication with flight 77. Now some 280 miles from the Pentagon.

8:56 : Transponder contact lost. Now some 335 miles from the Pentagon.

9:00 : Flight 77 turns and heads for the Pentagon (Washington DC). Now some 370 miles away from the Pentagon.

The hijackers finally make their move (and about time, all the time they are getting further and further away from where they started, and of course, further and further away from where they are headed).

To give the Air National Guard/USAF a fighting chance the intrepid hijackers wait till they are about 400 miles away from their target before turning back.

But even though the hijackers are more than sporting about the whole affair (after all they have given the USAF over 40 minutes to get aircraft up to investigate, and if necessary, shoot them down) the totally incompetent (read corrupt) USAF isn't quite up to the job.

9:37 : AA77 crashes into the southwest side of the Pentagon. Now, precisely 0 miles from the Pentagon.

The question that you must ask yourself, is :

Why didn't the hijackers, hijack flight 77 when it was only, say, 30 miles from the Pentagon?

Well, lets have look at the evidence from another angle.
Flight 77 leaves Dulles International Airport at 8:20 am.
Flight 77's transponder is turned off at 8:56 am.
The fact that flight 77's transponder was turned off means only that the aircraft stopped transmitting its name and altitude, etc, but it was still very visible to radar.
Flight 77 disappears from all radar screens a couple of minutes later, somewhere near the Ohio border.
An aircraft appears on radar south of Washington DC, close to the city.
This aircraft eventually crashes into the Pentagon.
So the aircraft that crashed into the Pentagon could not possibly have been flight 77. This is simply because, if it had flown from the Ohio border back to Washington DC it would have been visible to radar for the entire trip. And, we are told that it was not. So given this, why do most people believe that flight 77 hit the Pentagon? Because the media told them so (and this is the one and only reason that most believe flight 77 hit the Pentagon). But the evidence (without even examining the Pentagon scene itself) already says that this is impossible.

The next question that you must ask yourself, is :

How did flight 77 sneak all the way from the Ohio border to Washington DC without being spotted by any of the multitude of radar stations in the area? The Russians are keen to know.

[... and see further information following about USAF stand down and normal interception practices and times.]

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardian2/pentagon/what-hit-it.htm


This page sums up in one place pretty much all the damning evidence against the possibility of a passenger Boeing 757 hitting the Pentagon at all. Chief suspect is a missile with a depleted uranium warhead for extra penetration right to Ring C producing the smoking hole we see in photos (equally well, there's no reason explosives couldn't have been planted in the building during renovations to try to mimic an impact, no matter how unconvincingly):

http://consciouslifenews.com/911-prove-airplane-hit-pentagon-major-general-albert-stubblebine/#
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby ProfWag » 04 Jan 2015, 23:17

SydneyPSIder wrote:In response to the alleged 1,600 sets of identified remains:

I believe these are all faked results. First, once you consider that this was an inside job with the full complicity of a sector of government, you can no longer trust anything they say on the matter. It's easy for them to say they have matched DNA, but no-one saw the lab workers do it. No-one has seen any test results.

With logic like that, Elvis, Michael Jackson, and Man Haron Monis are all alive and drinking coffee together in Tahiti.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby ProfWag » 04 Jan 2015, 23:24

Unfortunately Syd, with the exception of Winston (whom I wouldn't brag about), your opinions don't seem to have a lot of support in this forum so I don't believe I'll be wasting my time even reading your unresearched opines.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Ghostplanes on 9/11? Interesting reasons and clues

Postby SydneyPSIder » 05 Jan 2015, 09:13

ProfWag wrote:Unfortunately Syd, with the exception of Winston (whom I wouldn't brag about), your opinions don't seem to have a lot of support in this forum so I don't believe I'll be wasting my time even reading your unresearched opines.

Hilarious. I think you've overplayed your disinfo hand this time, wag, and what has been read cannot be unread. I'm sure people here are reading the 'opinions' with some interest. They're all either a requote of solid research and thinking by others, or my synthesis of the most likely elements of the research to date that create a coherent and achievable explanation for the subterfuge.
SydneyPSIder
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: 10 Sep 2012, 18:24

Previous

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 7 guests