Okay Steve.
Let's just assume for the sake of argument that the indiscernable blur on that expanded view IS actually a missile (though it's stretching the imagination a bit).
What do YOU think happened to AA Flight 77 and all the people on board?
9/11 prediction
Re: 9/11 prediction
jasonhallceltic wrote:
>>
No. It's a lot of nutters on the Internet.
>>
No. It's a lot of nutters on the Internet.
-
jasonhallceltic
- Posts: 427
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: 9/11 prediction
flat eric the video loose change has information on this, if u really want 2 debate this then u shud watch this video just so ure fully aware of both sides of the argument?
Re: 9/11 prediction
Something equally as scarey is what you'll find after looking into the 7/7 bombings.
From memory..
On the morning of 7/7 Visor, a security company were running a terror drill that simulated simultaneous attacks on the London Underground on the exact same stations it happened. Head of the compant Peter Power gave interviews on ITN and BBC Five Live on the day, this is FACT and on record, search the net. He has not been interviewed once, nor has the company contracted Visor to carry out the drill. The chances of this coincidence are in the billions+++. How many remember this? given the media do not mention it at all.
Not one single image of the bombers has ever been released while they were in london, only Luton. London has over 4 million CCTV cameras.
There has never been an official enquiry, the reason Tony Blair gave was the exact same reason Bush gave when he didn't want a 9/11 inquiry, that it would 'get in the way of the war on terror'.
The Bus that was bombed was the only bus in London that day to be diverted. Proves nothing, but as a result of the diversion, lots of people got off.
The government loves terrorism, ID cards, security cameras, detention without charge, stop and search, terrorism act. The only people who want to take away our freedom is the goverment.
There will never be public enquiry into 7/7, and if there is it will be a joke due to the Inquires act of 2005 which allows the minister of the department being investigated to oversea the inquiry. Sad.
From memory..
On the morning of 7/7 Visor, a security company were running a terror drill that simulated simultaneous attacks on the London Underground on the exact same stations it happened. Head of the compant Peter Power gave interviews on ITN and BBC Five Live on the day, this is FACT and on record, search the net. He has not been interviewed once, nor has the company contracted Visor to carry out the drill. The chances of this coincidence are in the billions+++. How many remember this? given the media do not mention it at all.
Not one single image of the bombers has ever been released while they were in london, only Luton. London has over 4 million CCTV cameras.
There has never been an official enquiry, the reason Tony Blair gave was the exact same reason Bush gave when he didn't want a 9/11 inquiry, that it would 'get in the way of the war on terror'.
The Bus that was bombed was the only bus in London that day to be diverted. Proves nothing, but as a result of the diversion, lots of people got off.
The government loves terrorism, ID cards, security cameras, detention without charge, stop and search, terrorism act. The only people who want to take away our freedom is the goverment.
There will never be public enquiry into 7/7, and if there is it will be a joke due to the Inquires act of 2005 which allows the minister of the department being investigated to oversea the inquiry. Sad.
Re: 9/11 prediction
Maybe they are some strange island with tropical conditions, polar bears, a hatch with strange numberszzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Re: 9/11 prediction
jasonhallceltic wrote:
>>
I'm fully aware of both sides, Jase.
There may well be important questions still to be answered over 9/11. And no doubt further revelations will come. I'm also not under any illusions about the integrity of politicians. But from what I've seen and read to date about 9/11 (and it's a lot), I've no reason to believe that essentially, 9/11 was anything other than a bunch of Arab terrorists flying airliners into buildings.
And I mean Arab terrorists. Not the CIA. Not some nebulous "New World Order". Not Mossad. Not the U.S. Government (although the question of mistakes and incompetence on the part of the U.S. Government is another matter).
The problem I have with Internet conspiracy theorists in general and with people like SBB on here (who contemptuously dismisses as "NeoCons or "Sun readers" anyone who doesn't share his favourite wild-eyed conspiracy theories and rabid hatred of George Dubya) is that they're not really interested in looking at the facts that are staring them in the face.
They're looking to prove what they want to be the truth - namely that it was "an inside job". So any and all "evidence" supporting that (no matter how dodgy or dubious) is eagerly accepted. Everything else is either ignored or explained away - like the thousands of eye witnesses who actually saw an airliner hit the Pentagon must be "in on it", that these or those photos were "faked", that this or that wreckage was "planted" by mysterious "men in black" while no-one was watching (obviously!) etc. etc. etc.
They spout pseudo-scientific claptrap about debris scatter patterns, the size of impact holes, controlled explosions, stress in steel girders and (this one's a favourite!) point to blurry CCTV vidcaps, declaring assorted shadows and blurs to be "proof" of missiles, underwing armament pods on aircraft and other such fanciful nonsense, all of which has been debunked time and again by civil engineers, structural engineers and aviation experts (oh I forgot - they're all "in on it" as well).
In fact, the conspiracy theorists' approach is remarkably similar to that of a believer in God. Rather than establish the truth (or not) of their belief, they prefer to try to create "equivalence" between their beliefs and the case as put by "the Establishment".
The logic goes something like this:
"You cannot prove 100% that the official story is correct. Therefore it might be incorrect. Therefore our case could be correct. If both cases might or might not be correct then they are equally valid".
It ignores probabilities and likely outcomes completely and equates an unproven flight of fancy with a probable explanation supported by reams of scientific evidence and thousands of eye-witness accounts.
So it won't make any difference how many questions are answered or theories debunked. They just ignore or dismiss the answers. Or when a theory gets debunked they simply bring up the same old thing again later on like it'd never been addressed before (a "new" '9/11 truth' thread gets started up on here every so often, as it does on other forums I frequent, and it's invariably the same old suspects going over the same tired old ground). These theories flourish because people want to believe them, and they'll stick around no matter how many answers are delivered.
- Eric
>>
I'm fully aware of both sides, Jase.
There may well be important questions still to be answered over 9/11. And no doubt further revelations will come. I'm also not under any illusions about the integrity of politicians. But from what I've seen and read to date about 9/11 (and it's a lot), I've no reason to believe that essentially, 9/11 was anything other than a bunch of Arab terrorists flying airliners into buildings.
And I mean Arab terrorists. Not the CIA. Not some nebulous "New World Order". Not Mossad. Not the U.S. Government (although the question of mistakes and incompetence on the part of the U.S. Government is another matter).
The problem I have with Internet conspiracy theorists in general and with people like SBB on here (who contemptuously dismisses as "NeoCons or "Sun readers" anyone who doesn't share his favourite wild-eyed conspiracy theories and rabid hatred of George Dubya) is that they're not really interested in looking at the facts that are staring them in the face.
They're looking to prove what they want to be the truth - namely that it was "an inside job". So any and all "evidence" supporting that (no matter how dodgy or dubious) is eagerly accepted. Everything else is either ignored or explained away - like the thousands of eye witnesses who actually saw an airliner hit the Pentagon must be "in on it", that these or those photos were "faked", that this or that wreckage was "planted" by mysterious "men in black" while no-one was watching (obviously!) etc. etc. etc.
They spout pseudo-scientific claptrap about debris scatter patterns, the size of impact holes, controlled explosions, stress in steel girders and (this one's a favourite!) point to blurry CCTV vidcaps, declaring assorted shadows and blurs to be "proof" of missiles, underwing armament pods on aircraft and other such fanciful nonsense, all of which has been debunked time and again by civil engineers, structural engineers and aviation experts (oh I forgot - they're all "in on it" as well).
In fact, the conspiracy theorists' approach is remarkably similar to that of a believer in God. Rather than establish the truth (or not) of their belief, they prefer to try to create "equivalence" between their beliefs and the case as put by "the Establishment".
The logic goes something like this:
"You cannot prove 100% that the official story is correct. Therefore it might be incorrect. Therefore our case could be correct. If both cases might or might not be correct then they are equally valid".
It ignores probabilities and likely outcomes completely and equates an unproven flight of fancy with a probable explanation supported by reams of scientific evidence and thousands of eye-witness accounts.
So it won't make any difference how many questions are answered or theories debunked. They just ignore or dismiss the answers. Or when a theory gets debunked they simply bring up the same old thing again later on like it'd never been addressed before (a "new" '9/11 truth' thread gets started up on here every so often, as it does on other forums I frequent, and it's invariably the same old suspects going over the same tired old ground). These theories flourish because people want to believe them, and they'll stick around no matter how many answers are delivered.
- Eric
Re: 9/11 prediction
Erik, I think you are missing the point slightly. The official story is itself a conspiracy theory. The biggest one of all.
Most of the information on the web about 9/11 does not offer alternative wild theories but instead questions the official theory for it's huge lack of evidence and un-answered questions.
If you study the FACTS, just the facts without going into any theories then the official theory just falls apart. To say people try to prove what they want to be the truth is wrong.
I can't imagine many people who want their government to kill their own people. But when you have 1 official story provided by that goverment which contradicts so so many truths and only makes the alternative theories even stronger then it's foolish to ignore it.
Don't take my word for it, simply look into the wealth of information on the net and see for yourself.
Regarding the pentagon photographs, to me they show nothing but an explosion. It's impossible to make out anything else. In my opinion this is not what people should be looking at, instead they should be asking why all the other footage from the gas station, hotel, other pentagon cameras was gathered within 5 minutes of the attack by ther FBI and to this day has never been released. If it happened they way they said, then why create all this doubt by withholding thoe footage?
Most of the information on the web about 9/11 does not offer alternative wild theories but instead questions the official theory for it's huge lack of evidence and un-answered questions.
If you study the FACTS, just the facts without going into any theories then the official theory just falls apart. To say people try to prove what they want to be the truth is wrong.
I can't imagine many people who want their government to kill their own people. But when you have 1 official story provided by that goverment which contradicts so so many truths and only makes the alternative theories even stronger then it's foolish to ignore it.
Don't take my word for it, simply look into the wealth of information on the net and see for yourself.
Regarding the pentagon photographs, to me they show nothing but an explosion. It's impossible to make out anything else. In my opinion this is not what people should be looking at, instead they should be asking why all the other footage from the gas station, hotel, other pentagon cameras was gathered within 5 minutes of the attack by ther FBI and to this day has never been released. If it happened they way they said, then why create all this doubt by withholding thoe footage?
-
andy at handiwork
- Posts: 4113
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: 9/11 prediction
Sanity returns. Couldn't have put it better myself Flat E.
Re: 9/11 prediction
The kennedy assassination was also on camera....and just how many people still subscribe to the magic bullet theory?....
The TV evidence only serves to fuel the fire because it's there for all to see.
The TV evidence only serves to fuel the fire because it's there for all to see.