I've read most of the discussions on this subject but there is one aspect no one [that I know of] has addressed. IF the 911 videos were false, faked or otherwise altered one question has not been addressed, and it has nothing to do with the buildings. My question also includes the Pentagon crash and the flight terminated in the PA field. [Remember, this one has a ‘recorded’ phone conversation ending with ‘LET’S ROLL’.] What happened to all the passengers on these flights? Does everyone suggest that all passengers of record on these flights were faked? Were ‘bought off’? Whole families were ‘bought off’? The passengers/ families were – what?? Or, do does everyone contend there were NO PASSENGERS ON THESE FLIGHTS?
go to this thread.
The videos were not faked, "Let's Roll" is a propaganda line that banker joked about using that day. The people on the planes were not faked. It is more intricate than the bluebeam jokers think. Go to that thread and watch the videos at the link. He actually has insider information. They have done everything to destroy him since then, too.
" IF the 911 videos were false,"
Try to stay with us here...the real truthers are not suggesting your ridiculous, stupid, pointless questions...
one question...its super simple...either try and answer it, or at least say "I don't know"...
how did the BBC know WTC 7 fell BEFORE it ACTUALLY FELL?
this last poster, imitgov...will you listen to the audio at the link i posted?
Why do people avoid this when i am trying to show them ACTUAL evidence? You just want to play troll games where you try to make fools of people by asking a question that is in a poison well.
Listen to Richard Grove go over example after example of people who knew before hand what was going to happen...jesus the BBC knew because they are an arm of propaganda that is used to confuse people and they employ useful idiots.
Bayou Castine: I've read most of the discussions on this subject but there is one aspect no one [that I know of] has addressed. IF the 911 videos were false, faked or otherwise altered one question has not been addressed, and it has nothing to do with the buildings. My question also includes the Pentagon crash and the flight terminated in the PA field. [Remember, this one has a ‘recorded’ phone conversation ending with ‘LET’S ROLL’.] What happened to all the passengers on these flights? Does everyone suggest that all passengers of record on these flights were faked? Were ‘bought off’? Whole families were ‘bought off’? The passengers/ families were – what?? Or, do does everyone contend there were NO PASSENGERS ON THESE FLIGHTS?
If you have the mental capacity to seriously and openly consider [as an idea, or concept ] the possibility that, based on the evidence, all 4 flights were in fact faked, then you have to seriously consider, as part of that idea, that the passenger lists were faked too, as were the famous [and apparently technically impossible] reported phone calls from those flights. The one idea follows from the other, logically speaking.
Bayou Castine [nice name!] said: "Or, do does everyone contend there were NO PASSENGERS ON THESE FLIGHTS?" .
Probably no one here except for myself and possibly Newson.
However, regardless of what anyone says here,[ including myself], you have to do your own research and reach your own conclusions , and then be responsible for them, and accept the possibility that even after that, you still could be wrong in your conclusions, as there may well be evidence that you have overlooked or simply not been aware of that contradicts your findings to date.
Don't be swayed by verbal histrionics, the use of caps, verbal threats/rudeness/insults, supposed "expert " status, or moderator status, claimed "witness" status, or whatever form of intimidation attempted, just do your own research and reach your own [perhaps tentative] conclusions.
I would suggest that as a general research methodology, that instead of just blindly dismissing some idea[s] out of hand because they at first seem ridiculous and contradict what you think you already know, that it is far more useful to keep an open mind and consider the possibilities [of any/all "ridiculous" theories] and then just follow along as an interested [yet unconvinced] observer and see where they take you.
Regards, onebornfree
For more information about onebornfree, please see profile.[ i.e. click on forum name "onebornfree"].
you should look into other evidence that might prove your theory false. Listen to the guy in the link i posted. Take in all accounts before dismissing others. You need to see the whole spectrum to decide what is relevant and what is not.
Personally, I think the "no planes" theory is a distraction. There is real evidence out there that has to do with who pulled it off and why. To focus on something so polarizing (People didn't really see planes!!) and to bring it up constantly is absurd and takes away from legitimate research.
The last person on here that should giving lessons on dismissing evidence and sound methodological research should be the above poster. The evidence for his posit is merely anecdotal.
@Bayou: Doesn't really matter. We don't need to construct a counter-hypothesis in order to invalidate the government's lies. The government is clearly lying. They might be lying because they did it. They might be lying because they helped genuine al-Qaeda terrorists do it or turned a blind eye because it was politically useful. Or, this might have been the work of a foreign government, such as Israel. In any case, the government has an overwhelming motivation to lie. The only case in which the government would not lie is if a rag-tag band of strip-club-patronizing al-Qaeda "terrorists" had actually hijacked the planes in the manner described by the government. The only problem is that that story is simply not believable.
Did the government purposely kill a bunch of people on 9/11? Or did they fake the dead people (just an empty list of names?) Or was it a secret government within the government that did it - this is the claim that bin Laden himself made on 9/16/01 when he disavowed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks (though expressed approval of them). The details don't matter. All that matters is that it's fairly easy to ascertain that the government's explanation of the events of 9/11 is simply false. As with most crimes, we may neer know the truth but we can sure as hell spot a big hairy, wart-covered lie like the one the government is trying to spoon us.
Clayton -
to marky mark:
reliable witnesses, sure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9VnZ-BMR3s&feature=related
That video was so amateur...all anecdotal evidence and taken out of context in some cases
watch this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYk0FSJ5cSs&feature=related
Just as worthless, but has the same level of relevance. People are so dumb.
just to be clear, the point is that the witnesses' performances just don't seem credible, they seem to be acting, and badly at that. now, if the state offered tangible proof, such as one of the supposed planes' parts, with serial number and log-record, then i would say that would strengthen its planes-into-buildings-narrative.
it's the government that has to prove its version and come up with the forensic evidence, not the 9/11 skeptics, right or wrong might they be.
Right right. They are the dumb ones. Whoever would whore themselves to sell some sleazy docu to a bunch of people is an idiot...
If you listen to that monologue that no one else wanted to listen to, the guys discusses how all of the planes went over this particular airport that is used by the CIA and defense contractors for private reasons. It is the airport that the Iranian hostages were brought to when they were freed. He says that the planes were switched and the black boxes were removed. It is much more likely that the planes that hit the towers were military (or MORE likely PMC planes).
AFTER the event anything could be staged and some documentary is not beyond belief, especially if it is not for the US audience.
to clayton:
the department of defense, with respect to bin laden's admission of guilt:
" The translation is what it is. We never said it was a literal translation."
"it is not a verbatim translation of every word spoken at the meeting, but it does convey the messages and the information flow."
http://www.911closeup.com/index.shtml?ID=51