Conspiracy Theory

OpEdNews: By paul craig roberts

<---snip--->
9/11:

Let's take a minute to re-acquaint ourselves with the official explanation, which is not regarded as a conspiracy theory despite the fact that it comprises an amazing conspiracy. The official truth is that a handful of young Muslim Arabs who could not fly airplanes, mainly Saudi Arabians who came neither from Iraq nor from Afghanistan, outwitted not only the CIA and the FBI, but also all 16 US intelligence agencies and all intelligence agencies of US allies including Israel's Mossad, which is believed to have penetrated every terrorist organization and which carries out assassinations of those whom Mossad marks as terrorists.

In addition to outwitting every intelligence agency of the United States and its allies, the handful of young Saudi Arabians outwitted the National Security Council, the State Department, NORAD, airport security four times in the same hour on the same morning, air traffic control, caused the US Air Force to be unable to launch interceptor aircraft, and caused three well-built steel-structured buildings, including one not hit by an airplane, to fail suddenly in a few seconds as a result of limited structural damage and small, short-lived, low-temperature fires that burned on a few floors.

The Saudi terrorists were even able to confound the laws of physics and cause WTC building seven to collapse at free-fall speed for several seconds, a physical impossibility in the absence of explosives used in controlled demolition.

<---snip--->

Anyone who believes an architect, structural engineer, or demolition expert who says that the videos show that the buildings are blowing up, not falling down, anyone who believes a Ph.D. physicist who says that the official explanation is inconsistent with known laws of physics, anyone who believes expert pilots who testify that non-pilots or poorly-qualified pilots cannot fly airplanes in such maneuvers, anyone who believes the 100 or more first-responders who testify that they not only heard explosions in the towers but personally experienced explosions, anyone who believes University of Copenhagen nano-chemist Niels Harrit who reports finding unreacted nano-thermite in dust samples from the WTC towers, anyone who is convinced by experts instead of by propaganda is dismissed as a kook.

Link: http://www.opednews.com/a/133450?show=votes#allcomments

total nonsense, right?

"facts" apart easily.

Have you bothered to fact-check this?

There are no facts, only interpretations - Friedrich Nietzsche

It is verbotten here to talk about how the OCTERS have hitched their wagon to GWB, so forget I even said that.

Having not said that, why is it that the ideas presented here are not being refuted?
It's like: "That OP violates my core beliefs so all I can do is obfuscate"

But the fact remains that a small group of men worked modern miracles that day. That is if you believe the OCT. EH?

Building 7 is where it seems to really fall apart for me. The full truth however, one way or the other, will never be known in any of our lifetimes. False flag Op, or guys with box cutters....you decide.

WTC 7?

Simple question: why does the structural engineering community accept NIST's conclusions? Why aren't they up in arms about it?

known between 1901 and 1988 as the National Bureau of Standards (NBS), is a measurement standards laboratory which is a non-regulatory agency of the United States Department of Commerce.

have a vested interest in maintaining the 'official' story line.

you are smearing hundreds of dedicated career public servants by accusing them of complicity in the deaths of thousands of their fellow citizens. They produced exhaustive studies, which I am willing to bet you have not read.

You need to look up the logical fallacy known as the "genetic fallacy".

you're not open-minded? That's a pre-condition for learning what happened that day.

is it only an "interpretation" that 2+2=4?

But I suppose your quote explains why you can blithely accept Roberts' "interpretation" that the hijackers "could not fly airplanes." Out in the real world, where it's considered a "fact" that they could, Roberts looks like a liar and/or a fool.

In all my studies, I have yet to read one viable link pertaining to the alleged hijackers being able to fly the planes per the OCT.

I'm sure you have a link from an established pilot group that would back up your assertion, because you wouldn't just make that shit up. Would you?

The training is well documented in the 9/11 Commission Report, but I don't think anyone here would expect you to know that.

""In the beginning was the bushies and everything they said was true""?
All one has to have is faith? I've none.

I've seen no evidence from pilots who would truthfully say:
"Oh yeah, it's easy to fly planes the way those planes were said to have been flown."

... is totally irrelevant to anything, especially in view of the sorry state of your knowledge of the entire subject.

> I've seen no evidence from pilots who would truthfully say:
"Oh yeah, it's easy to fly planes the way those planes were said to have been flown."

Again, I'm not surprised, given the way you "studiously" avoid contact with any information that might damage your delusions. Unfortunately for your attempted argument (which would be fallacious anyway), many professional pilots have said that the hijackers had sufficient training to do what they did. Since I've played a bit myself with Microsoft's Flight Simulator and found that it's pretty easy to crash into buildings even much smaller than the WTC towers and the Pentagon, I think I'll accept their opinions over those of a bunch of crackpots desperately trying to make their delusions look like rational conclusions. When you say "the way those planes were said to have been flown," I know that you personally find it remarkable that Hanjour could fly a 757 so "skillfully," so I assume that sort of nonsense is what you're referring to? Well, out in the real world, Hanjour's slow, sloppy turn followed by narrowly pulling up from a shallow dive in time to avoid crashing into the bridge or "lawn darting" implies the same thing as his pilot training record: He was a pretty shitty pilot. I never would have trusted him to land that thing safely. :eyes:

So, you have a link to these pilots that back up your unfounded assertions?

OCTERS are stuck on the OCT and are the one's who are blind to anything that contradicts their faith. And here you project that shit on me? Bwahahahahaa!!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Anyway, sure, I'm always glad to help you with your "studies." There are many, but you can start with this one, which I was just reading a few days ago so still have the link in my browser history:
http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf

####REDACTED####

> OCTERS are stuck on the OCT and are the one's who are blind to anything that contradicts their faith. And here you project that shit on me? Bwahahahahaa!!

####REDACTED####

Forget about "OCTERS"; the reason the "truth movement" is dead is because of its inability to offer convincing evidence and sound arguments to rational people.

I spent many an hour studying that site. All it did was convince me even more that bushco was involved. It served a good purpose and I recommend people do study it -- carefully.

What I am looking for is a quote from a pilots' group about how easy it is to fly heavy planes without 100's of hours of training. We know there are many pilots that totally discount the OCT idea. What I am looking for are pilots that agree with the OCT. From a valid site.

And any assertions that the number of people questioning the OCT is shrinking, must have come from that same 'mythical' site that is dieing more everyday.

And still you're always surprised when someone points out that the "questions" you are asking are answered there? And you think that farting in that general direction is sufficient rebuttal?

All you've got is incredulity, and sadly you need to protect that with willful ignorance. That's some "truth movement" ya got there, BeFree. But FYI, while you weren't looking people have been sneaking out the back door in droves. It's nothing but a quirky little net cult now.

And I don't believe much of "myths" opinions. Which it is full of. Infested with, actually. Like some nasty virus.

Why are you trying to make this about me? All I am doing is studying the available facts and coming to my own opinions. TYVM.

Excuse me for LMAO, but the proof is right here in this thread that "studying the available facts" is exactly what you refuse to do. You're allergic to the available facts.

Because I refuse to look at a pdf from a known-crackpipe site?

You mean you can't even find a quote from anywhere else on the whole www?

You got nothing. You never had anything or you would be proudly posting it here and waving it around. There is nothing from any viable source which says the alleged pilots could have flown the heavies the way bushco claim. Basically, all you have is a silly dream. A fantasy. A myth.

Admit it. Or you can post some quotes. Your choice. Whimper away, or fight.

... to test whether or not you will refuse to look at them, too? I suppose we could perform that experiment, but why should anyone expect a different result this time? Why should anyone care about your willfully ignorant opinions, anyway?

Why do you care about my opinion? Why do you get all worked up?

My studied opinion is that the alleged pilots could not have flown the planes on 9/11.
Since you have produced nothing that would change my opinion, you are just spinning.

Actually, your spinning is in a sense, cannibalistic, in that it seems to be eating you alive?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Seger has given reasons for his opinions. You haven't, unless excuses for not looking at Seger's evidence count as reasons. So, bragging that he can't change your opinions doesn't seem to amount to much.

Excuse me for trying to give you a clue.

That and a link to a pdf from a crackpipe website that is so far up bushco's ass that it can't see any light?

And you can't even pull a quote from that to post here? Are you ashamed of what that crackpipe pdf claims?

I told you I read that site. And you know my opinion of it.
The only clue you have given me is a clue that you and the crackpipe website are in the same boat. Same sinking boat.

Seger brought substance; you didn't.

Thanks!

That is a bald-faced lie. Fighter jets were scrambled from Otis and Langley ANG bases and can be easily confirmed through multiple sources. In order to understand the issues surrounding this, one has to understand the difference between "on alert" and "combat-ready" status fighter jets. Since the end of the Cold War, the US whittled down the number of "on-alert" fighter jets to a small number encircling the country.

PCR is lying through his teeth here.

and a darling of hate site VDARE.

Is that really who you want to hitch your wagon to?

Sid

This idea that the airforce failed to launch interceptor aircraft that day is not exactly true.

They (defense forces) launched such craft, however it did fail to EFFECTIVELY intercept any planes.
So, all in all, a failure.

Other than that, the OP is dead on.

Thanks to the other poster for intercepting that.

there have been seven "official stories" (so far) regarding the military jets.

the first one -- 2 days after the attacks and given by richard myers (the head of the joint chiefs of staff) to congress -- was that NO planes were scrambled until after the pentagon was hit (i.e., after the attacks were over). he was very clear about this, and he said it twice.

by the end of the week, however, a new "official" story emerged (via cbs news) which included jets being scrambled, but, by golly, they could not get there in time. over time, there were six different accounts put forth.

the 9/11 commission, in its report, threw them all out the window, and invented a new, and 7th, official story.

Even in August the Russians were so worried that something was going to come

down -- a false flag to be blamed on them -- that they went to the United Nations

Security Council will the information they had been passing to the White House

and our intelligence agencies and which was being ignored -- "Operation Ignore"

by Bush White House, etal.

So the United Nations Security Council then sent their representatives -- in August --

to visit the White House and our intelligence agencies making sure that the info

the Russians had on the plot and the names of those involved were once again passed

along!

Meanwhile, W was putting Cheney in charge of EVERYTHING --

and plans were being made to move NORAD out of the way!!