9/11 was an inside job

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not sure where to put this, but this is as good a spot as any....
Just another conspiracy theory fabricated and believed by dim witted nutbags.......

n January 2014, thousands of people in the usually warm southern US city of Atlanta, Georgia experienced a rare snowstorm which effectively brought it to a standstill.

The storm, which left around two to three inches of snow on the ground, caused virtual gridlock on the roads and thousands of people were left trapped on the city's highways for hours.

While some considered the storm a freak occurrence similar to the Polar Vortex which recently gripped most of the country – or even a direct consequence of global warming and climate change – many felt there was an altogether more sinister explanation.

Meet the fake snow conspiracy theorists, those who believe the snow which recently fell in states such as Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia was planted by the government.

There are countless videos online of people showing the snow does not melt or leave a puddle of water when exposed to an open flame, and also leaves a black mark resembling an attempt to melt Styrofoam.

YouTube videos show people attempting to melt the snow using a lighter or a blowtorch.

When this fails, they see it as proof that the government is deploying an old weapon known as geo-engineering" – whereby the administration uses the weather as a weapon – or that "chemtrails" are being sprayed into the air as part of a covert government operation to slow down the global warming process by increasing the amount of sunlight that is reflected back into space.


"You're being distracted from all fronts, you're preoccupied. They're up here signing bills, the government, to pretty much take away more of your rights and freedoms," said YouTube user Occult Sin on one of his videos, which purports to expose the fake snow "truth".

However, as the number of videos uploaded online began to increase, scientists came forward to give an explanation as to why the 'fake snow' does not melt.


Steve Ackerman, a professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences at the UW-Madison, explained to the Wisconsin State Journal that when you heat snow, it turns from a solid to a gas during a process called sublimation.

"Whenever there is an interface of air and water, either liquid or solid, you have molecules trying to leave the water," he said.

"The constantly vibrating molecules in a liquid or solid are restrained but a water molecule will escape the water and enter the air when it moves violently enough.


We call that evaporation from a liquid, and sublimation from a solid," Ackerman said.

The black mark left on the ground can also simply be explained as butane from the lighter after being exposed to the snow.

Scientists add that the effects of sublimation can be seen in freezers, when ice cubes sometimes shrink over time, or when snow melts in a field.

"You notice there's no liquid water, none of the hard ice that results from melting and refreezing, but the snow still shrinks," Ackerman added.


http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/act-gov-meet-americas-fake-snow-conspiracy-theorists-1435094
 
What's this crap?

Why do you think you can debate with me when you admit that you're not going to bother reading what I type?

These are the actions of willful ignorance.

A mindless dumb response to everything I say with an attempted straw man argument.

All you're doing is wasting your own time with your utter stupidity.
 
Let me post this again because this is important.

This is quite long.

A plane that lands at an airport half a mile from the Pentagon less than two minutes AFTER the the Pentagon is supposedly struck.

Not only that but a string of incredible coincidences that accompany this plane.

Firstly

A search for all American Airlines scheduled flights departing from Washington Dulles International Airport on September 11th, 2001 showed no reference to Flight number 0077, the plane reportedly hijacked during flight to Los Angeles.
Flight number 0077 is a daily flight, however, it wasn't scheduled for flight on September 11th, 2001. I found that odd. No schedule for a flight which was reported to have taken place.
Maybe an administration error or oversight, or maybe I wasn't using the database properly..

Here is the full list of American Airlines scheduled flights departing from Washington Dulles International Airport on September 11th, 2001;

Airport: Washington, DC - Washington Dulles International (IAD)
Carrier Code Date

(MM/DD/YYYY) Flight Number Tail Number Destination Airport Actual Departure Time
AA 09/11/2001 0075 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0135 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0143 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0371 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0397 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0510 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0573 N871AA DFW 7:49
AA 09/11/2001 0599 N3BFAA SUN 6:57
AA 09/11/2001 0771 N3CAAA MIA 7:34
AA 09/11/2001 0975 N2ANAA ORD 6:26
AA 09/11/2001 1217 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1229 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1247 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1309 UNKNOWN DFW 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1319 UNKNOWN DFW 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1361 N493AA DFW 6:17
AA 09/11/2001 1787 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00

Yes the very people whose job it is to report every flight landing and take off failed to log the departure of Flight 77 from Dulles on September 11th 2001. Here's their listings for September 10th 2001.

Airport: Washington, DC - Washington Dulles International (IAD)
Carrier Code Date

(MM/DD/YYYY) Flight Number Tail Number Destination Airport Actual Departure Time
AA 09/10/2001 0075 N302AA LAX 8:00
AA 09/10/2001 0077 N632AA LAX 8:10AA 09/10/2001 0135 N5ESAA LAX 11:15
AA 09/10/2001 0143 N304AA LAX 15:00
AA 09/10/2001 0371 N866AA DFW 16:10
AA 09/10/2001 0397 N219AA DFW 12:55
AA 09/10/2001 0510 UNKNOWN DFW 17:51
AA 09/10/2001 0573 N719AA DFW 9:23
AA 09/10/2001 0599 N849AA DFW 7:56
AA 09/10/2001 0771 N3BWAA SJU 7:00
AA 09/10/2001 0975 N3BGAA MIA 7:34
AA 09/10/2001 1217 N2BGAA ORD 6:25
AA 09/10/2001 1223 N2CGAA ORD 9:45
AA 09/10/2001 1229 N2DFAA ORD 13:25
AA 09/10/2001 1247 N2AGAA ORD 20:21
AA 09/10/2001 1309 N871AA DFW 14:20
AA 09/10/2001 1319 N497AA DFW 19:32
AA 09/10/2001 1361 N226AA DFW 6:15
AA 09/10/2001 1787 N2BLAA ORD 16:55

If the quick knee jerk excuse is that everything was confused on that day well look at this.

Airport: Boston, MA - Logan International (BOS)
Carrier Code Date (MM/DD/YYYY) Flight Number Tail Number Destination Airport Actual Departure Time
UA 09/11/2001 0051 UNKNOW LAX 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0159 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0161 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0163 N526UA SFO 6:57
UA 09/11/2001 0167 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0169 UNKNOW LAX 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0171 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0173 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0175 N612UA LAX 7:58 UA 09/11/2001 0177 UNKNOW LAX 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0199 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0211 N463UA IAD 7:39
UA 09/11/2001 0223 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0317 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0420 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0503 N314UA ORD 5:52
UA 09/11/2001 0505 N431UA DEN 7:52
UA 09/11/2001 0507 N564UA ORD 7:28
UA 09/11/2001 0509 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0515 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0519 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0523 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0531 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0575 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0583 N433UA DEN 5:57
UA 09/11/2001 0595 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0701 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0883 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0895 N461UA ORD 8:24
UA 09/11/2001 0987 UNKNOW JFK 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0999 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1015 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1051 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1119 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1153 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1411 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1439 N356UA ORD 6:26
UA 09/11/2001 1607 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1685 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1690 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1789 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1877 N556UA IAD 6:39
UA 09/11/2001 1879 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1947 N435UA IAD 0:00

No problem with Flight 175. the plane that allegedly hit the south tower.

But there's more. There's this:

A chat between air traffic controller on the land line...recorded.

Quote:
9:11:23 — Indianapolis Control, Henderson Sector Radar Associate: know just where he left from or uh.

9:11:25 — Indianapolis Control, Dacos Radar Associate: there's no flight plan in the machine right now and - .

9:11:28 — Indianapolis Control, Henderson Sector Radar Associate: yeah I just looked at that, too.


An hour into the supposed flight Indianapolis still had no flight plan for American Airlines Flight 77. A chat with an airline pilot recalls how he regularly gets stuck at the gate because operations hasn't filed the flight plan to all the Control centres enroute. The fact that Indianapolis hadn't got AA77 flight plan is significant because he wouldn't have taken off and as we have already seen, he didn't.

We're not finished yet.

Supplementary to this here's the statistics for Ronald Reagan Airport.

All planes into Ronald Reagan Airport, half mile from the Pentagon, diverted except the last one. Now isn't that strange boys and girls?

The plane that reportedly struck the Pentagon was N644AA The mystery plane Tail number N644AW Only the last letter of the tail number is different.

And look at the landing time.

At the very least this plane was landing whilst events were taking place. Whilst Hani Hanjour was making this weird maneuver over Washington a legitimate flight (with a very similar tail number) was landing at the same time half a mile away. How did they know that this plane wasn't heading for the White House?


Quote
The aircraft crashed into the western side of the Pentagon at 09:37 EDT
- wikipedia. (Actually it was probably nearer to 09:38 )

washington.jpg


See Hanjour's supposed path and position of Ronald Reagan airport. Continue the arrow forward in the turn and you can land at Ronald Reagan Airport, precisely as N644AW did two minutes after Hanjour's plane supposedly struck.

Quote:
"One more note, as we had many odd occurrences with lights flickering, movie screens up and down, Annette (Air traffic controller on duty) mentioned that (N)644AW is known to most f/as as the "ghost ship" in America West system."

Air traffic controller at Washington sept 11th 2001.

So the ATC witness confirms it was there.

So was it this plane that the eyewitnesses saw? Did this plane overfly the Pentagon and land at Ronald Reagan Airport?

It gets better, read on.

0188154.jpg


American Airlines Flight 77:

Tail#: N644AA
Owner: Wilmington Trust Co.
Disappearing transponder signal location: Ohio, 8:56 amImpact time: *9:38 am*, Pentagon


America West Flight 0098:

Tail#: N644AW
Owner: Wilmington Trust Co.
Departure: Ohio, 8:40 (Wheels off time) Arrival: *9:39 am*

America West filed for bankruptcy in 1991, but was "rescued".

Yes the America West flight 98 that landed at Ronald Reagan Airport less than two minutes after all mayhem was breaking out at the Pentagon took off from Columbia Ohio Airport which is just north of where American Airlines Flight 77's transponder was last recorded.


Quote
Timeline:

CMH = Columbus Airport. It's located (precisely) at the north of the point where the transponder of AA77 is switched off and it disappears":

"At roughly 8:56 the plane appears to stop in south Ohio:"

"At 9:07 it suddenly reappears further along its flight path then then stops again, apparently moving west":

"At 9:25 the plane reappears again this time on the border between Indiana and Illinois":

"At *9:43* (after the official crash into the Pentagon) Flight 77 is flying over south Illinois and is nowhere near the Pentagon.) The last few blips after that seem to be fairly random, but ultimately the plane seems to get as far as Kansas.

This plane is showing Flight 77 transponder ID

It seems America West Flight 98 is posing (on Secondary RADAR) as American Airlines Flight 77 over Washington. This plane overflies the Pentagon and lands at Ronald Reagan Airport.

In 5 years of investigation of flight 98 (passengers etc) no information has been found. It's a government plane.

The Evacuation of Reagan Airport at *9:30 am*

It seems that people were thrown out of Reagan Airport a few minutes before the Pentagon crash, at about 9:30, but it doesn't look like a controlled evacuation. Take a look at these statements from people on Reagan airport:


Lindsey Kriete, 24, of Wellesley was scheduled to leave Reagan National on a 10 a.m. flight to Boston. About 9:30 a.m., all hell broke loose, Kriete said, as airport personnel began running through the terminal, telling passengers to leave quickly. By the time Kriete had rounded up her belongings and tried to calm people who were crying, all the taxis were gone and the subway had shut down.

Another...

The phone rang. It was my sister, on her cell phone from Reagan National Airport in D.C. She was within minutes of boarding a plane to Atlanta when U.S. airspace was shut downand she was talking very fast:
"They're telling us to forget our bags and get out of the terminal!" she said. And then, as she got outside, she began to lose her composure. "I hear something that sounds like explosions . . . I'm afraid!"

It later became clear that the sounds she was hearing were actually coming from the Pentagon, which is near Reagan National.




So can anyone here tell me why Ronald Reagan Airport was evacuated before the Pentagon attack but neither the White House, The Senate nor the Pentagon was evacuated? AT ALL!!!!!

Might they have seen something they shouldn't have?

Oh and by the way.

There is no record of American Airlines ever previously using N644AA for the IAD Dulles - LAX Los Angeles route.

AA77DepartureStatistics.jpg


Please Note that the statement on this photograph is from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and NOT from a Conspiracy Theorist

Yes it's official American Airlines Flight 77 never took off that day.

It seems we just had aircraft posing as it as part of the exercises being conducted that day.

Northern Vigilance

Vigilant Warrior

Vigilant Guardian

Global Guardian

PS

In truth there was only one exercise that day but many different stations involved in the exercise had different names for this one exercise. The object was to foster confusion.
 
Let me summarize

It explains the flyover of the Pentagon by an aircraft that was too high to be recorded on the CCTV cameras.

Flight 77 never took off on Sept 11th 2001.

The fact that we have NTSB data from the FDR means that the authorities are lying through their teeth.

The data doesn't stack up with the official story anyway.
 
What's this crap?

Why do you think you can debate with me when you admit that you're not going to bother reading what I type?

These are the actions of willful ignorance.

A mindless dumb response to everything I say with an attempted straw man argument.

All you're doing is wasting your own time with your utter stupidity.



No, it's a fact that [1] You are in the conspiracy forum, [2] You ignore overwhelming evidence, [3] you use forums such as this because they are your only outlet, [4] the official version will stand because it is based on overwhelming evidence, [5] You seem to be getting rather excited, [6] The stupidity question is obvious to all logical thinking people...it's you claiming the Impossible...it's you claiming the ridiculious...it's you sprouting and shouting and getting banned from other forums with your childish obsesssions, [7] And it's you who will continue this crazy charade and trolling.
But in the end, the reality says that nothing will change...The 9/11 terrorist act with five planes the WTC towers, and the Pentagon was perpetrated by ratbag terrorists.
 
Go away you stupid halfwit.

Either respond to what I'm saying or

SHUT UP.

Don't get too excited...I've been told that when conspiracy ratbags get overheated, it can be fatal.

Again, your diatribe is just that DIATRIBE.
Oh, and guess what? I'm not quite ready to shut up just yet. :D
 
I'll post this again and get past this idiot whose obviously trying to snow job the discussion.

This is quite long.

A plane that lands at an airport half a mile from the Pentagon less than two minutes AFTER the the Pentagon is supposedly struck.

Not only that but a string of incredible coincidences that accompany this plane.

Firstly

A search for all American Airlines scheduled flights departing from Washington Dulles International Airport on September 11th, 2001 showed no reference to Flight number 0077, the plane reportedly hijacked during flight to Los Angeles.
Flight number 0077 is a daily flight, however, it wasn't scheduled for flight on September 11th, 2001. I found that odd. No schedule for a flight which was reported to have taken place.
Maybe an administration error or oversight, or maybe I wasn't using the database properly..

Here is the full list of American Airlines scheduled flights departing from Washington Dulles International Airport on September 11th, 2001;

Airport: Washington, DC - Washington Dulles International (IAD)
Carrier Code Date

(MM/DD/YYYY) Flight Number Tail Number Destination Airport Actual Departure Time
AA 09/11/2001 0075 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0135 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0143 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0371 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0397 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0510 UNKNOWN
AA 09/11/2001 0573 N871AA DFW 7:49
AA 09/11/2001 0599 N3BFAA SUN 6:57
AA 09/11/2001 0771 N3CAAA MIA 7:34
AA 09/11/2001 0975 N2ANAA ORD 6:26
AA 09/11/2001 1217 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1229 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1247 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1309 UNKNOWN DFW 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1319 UNKNOWN DFW 0:00
AA 09/11/2001 1361 N493AA DFW 6:17
AA 09/11/2001 1787 UNKNOWN ORD 0:00

Yes the very people whose job it is to report every flight landing and take off failed to log the departure of Flight 77 from Dulles on September 11th 2001. Here's their listings for September 10th 2001.

Airport: Washington, DC - Washington Dulles International (IAD)
Carrier Code Date

(MM/DD/YYYY) Flight Number Tail Number Destination Airport Actual Departure Time
AA 09/10/2001 0075 N302AA LAX 8:00
AA 09/10/2001 0077 N632AA LAX 8:10AA 09/10/2001 0135 N5ESAA LAX 11:15
AA 09/10/2001 0143 N304AA LAX 15:00
AA 09/10/2001 0371 N866AA DFW 16:10
AA 09/10/2001 0397 N219AA DFW 12:55
AA 09/10/2001 0510 UNKNOWN DFW 17:51
AA 09/10/2001 0573 N719AA DFW 9:23
AA 09/10/2001 0599 N849AA DFW 7:56
AA 09/10/2001 0771 N3BWAA SJU 7:00
AA 09/10/2001 0975 N3BGAA MIA 7:34
AA 09/10/2001 1217 N2BGAA ORD 6:25
AA 09/10/2001 1223 N2CGAA ORD 9:45
AA 09/10/2001 1229 N2DFAA ORD 13:25
AA 09/10/2001 1247 N2AGAA ORD 20:21
AA 09/10/2001 1309 N871AA DFW 14:20
AA 09/10/2001 1319 N497AA DFW 19:32
AA 09/10/2001 1361 N226AA DFW 6:15
AA 09/10/2001 1787 N2BLAA ORD 16:55

If the quick knee jerk excuse is that everything was confused on that day well look at this.

Airport: Boston, MA - Logan International (BOS)
Carrier Code Date (MM/DD/YYYY) Flight Number Tail Number Destination Airport Actual Departure Time
UA 09/11/2001 0051 UNKNOW LAX 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0159 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0161 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0163 N526UA SFO 6:57
UA 09/11/2001 0167 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0169 UNKNOW LAX 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0171 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0173 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0175 N612UA LAX 7:58 UA 09/11/2001 0177 UNKNOW LAX 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0199 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0211 N463UA IAD 7:39
UA 09/11/2001 0223 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0317 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0420 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0503 N314UA ORD 5:52
UA 09/11/2001 0505 N431UA DEN 7:52
UA 09/11/2001 0507 N564UA ORD 7:28
UA 09/11/2001 0509 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0515 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0519 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0523 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0531 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0575 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0583 N433UA DEN 5:57
UA 09/11/2001 0595 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0701 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0883 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0895 N461UA ORD 8:24
UA 09/11/2001 0987 UNKNOW JFK 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 0999 UNKNOW SFO 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1015 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1051 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1119 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1153 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1411 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1439 N356UA ORD 6:26
UA 09/11/2001 1607 UNKNOW DEN 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1685 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1690 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1789 UNKNOW ORD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1877 N556UA IAD 6:39
UA 09/11/2001 1879 UNKNOW IAD 0:00
UA 09/11/2001 1947 N435UA IAD 0:00

No problem with Flight 175. the plane that allegedly hit the south tower.

But there's more. There's this:

A chat between air traffic controller on the land line...recorded.

Quote:
9:11:23 — Indianapolis Control, Henderson Sector Radar Associate: know just where he left from or uh.

9:11:25 — Indianapolis Control, Dacos Radar Associate: there's no flight plan in the machine right now and - .

9:11:28 — Indianapolis Control, Henderson Sector Radar Associate: yeah I just looked at that, too.


An hour into the supposed flight Indianapolis still had no flight plan for American Airlines Flight 77. A chat with an airline pilot recalls how he regularly gets stuck at the gate because operations hasn't filed the flight plan to all the Control centres enroute. The fact that Indianapolis hadn't got AA77 flight plan is significant because he wouldn't have taken off and as we have already seen, he didn't.

We're not finished yet.

Supplementary to this here's the statistics for Ronald Reagan Airport.

All planes into Ronald Reagan Airport, half mile from the Pentagon, diverted except the last one. Now isn't that strange boys and girls?

The plane that reportedly struck the Pentagon was N644AA The mystery plane Tail number N644AW Only the last letter of the tail number is different.

And look at the landing time.

At the very least this plane was landing whilst events were taking place. Whilst Hani Hanjour was making this weird maneuver over Washington a legitimate flight (with a very similar tail number) was landing at the same time half a mile away. How did they know that this plane wasn't heading for the White House?


Quote
The aircraft crashed into the western side of the Pentagon at 09:37 EDT
- wikipedia. (Actually it was probably nearer to 09:38 )

washington.jpg


See Hanjour's supposed path and position of Ronald Reagan airport. Continue the arrow forward in the turn and you can land at Ronald Reagan Airport, precisely as N644AW did two minutes after Hanjour's plane supposedly struck.

Quote:
"One more note, as we had many odd occurrences with lights flickering, movie screens up and down, Annette (Air traffic controller on duty) mentioned that (N)644AW is known to most f/as as the "ghost ship" in America West system."

Air traffic controller at Washington sept 11th 2001.

So the ATC witness confirms it was there.

So was it this plane that the eyewitnesses saw? Did this plane overfly the Pentagon and land at Ronald Reagan Airport?

It gets better, read on.

0188154.jpg


American Airlines Flight 77:

Tail#: N644AA
Owner: Wilmington Trust Co.
Disappearing transponder signal location: Ohio, 8:56 amImpact time: *9:38 am*, Pentagon


America West Flight 0098:

Tail#: N644AW
Owner: Wilmington Trust Co.
Departure: Ohio, 8:40 (Wheels off time) Arrival: *9:39 am*

America West filed for bankruptcy in 1991, but was "rescued".

Yes the America West flight 98 that landed at Ronald Reagan Airport less than two minutes after all mayhem was breaking out at the Pentagon took off from Columbia Ohio Airport which is just north of where American Airlines Flight 77's transponder was last recorded.


Quote
Timeline:

CMH = Columbus Airport. It's located (precisely) at the north of the point where the transponder of AA77 is switched off and it disappears":

"At roughly 8:56 the plane appears to stop in south Ohio:"

"At 9:07 it suddenly reappears further along its flight path then then stops again, apparently moving west":

"At 9:25 the plane reappears again this time on the border between Indiana and Illinois":

"At *9:43* (after the official crash into the Pentagon) Flight 77 is flying over south Illinois and is nowhere near the Pentagon.) The last few blips after that seem to be fairly random, but ultimately the plane seems to get as far as Kansas.

This plane is showing Flight 77 transponder ID

It seems America West Flight 98 is posing (on Secondary RADAR) as American Airlines Flight 77 over Washington. This plane overflies the Pentagon and lands at Ronald Reagan Airport.

In 5 years of investigation of flight 98 (passengers etc) no information has been found. It's a government plane.

The Evacuation of Reagan Airport at *9:30 am*

It seems that people were thrown out of Reagan Airport a few minutes before the Pentagon crash, at about 9:30, but it doesn't look like a controlled evacuation. Take a look at these statements from people on Reagan airport:


Lindsey Kriete, 24, of Wellesley was scheduled to leave Reagan National on a 10 a.m. flight to Boston. About 9:30 a.m., all hell broke loose, Kriete said, as airport personnel began running through the terminal, telling passengers to leave quickly. By the time Kriete had rounded up her belongings and tried to calm people who were crying, all the taxis were gone and the subway had shut down.

Another...

The phone rang. It was my sister, on her cell phone from Reagan National Airport in D.C. She was within minutes of boarding a plane to Atlanta when U.S. airspace was shut downand she was talking very fast:
"They're telling us to forget our bags and get out of the terminal!" she said. And then, as she got outside, she began to lose her composure. "I hear something that sounds like explosions . . . I'm afraid!"

It later became clear that the sounds she was hearing were actually coming from the Pentagon, which is near Reagan National.




So can anyone here tell me why Ronald Reagan Airport was evacuated before the Pentagon attack but neither the White House, The Senate nor the Pentagon was evacuated? AT ALL!!!!!

Might they have seen something they shouldn't have?

Oh and by the way.

There is no record of American Airlines ever previously using N644AA for the IAD Dulles - LAX Los Angeles route.

AA77DepartureStatistics.jpg


Please Note that the statement on this photograph is from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and NOT from a Conspiracy Theorist

Yes it's official American Airlines Flight 77 never took off that day.

It seems we just had aircraft posing as it as part of the exercises being conducted that day.

Northern Vigilance

Vigilant Warrior

Vigilant Guardian

Global Guardian

PS

In truth there was only one exercise that day but many different stations involved in the exercise had different names for this one exercise. The object was to foster confusion.
 
And why should I read your fabricated nonsense?
When you are paranoid enough and silly enough, and gullible enough [or maybe just plain trolling] to blatently ignore the vast majority of evidence due to some fanatical agenda....

You still there???
 
You should also realize that repeated posting of the same article is known as trolling....but that's what you do best, isn't it?
 
A cursory note to moderators

What I've done here looks like spamming but when greeted by someone who admits he refuses to read what I type what else can I do.
If you genuinely want to get to the bottom of this then at least come back with any rebuttal information.

If you don't people like me will be in your face until we get a new inquiry. So you might as well respond.

Who knows you may convince me.

But as I said earlier, name calling only makes me think you have no reasoned argument and that only emboldens me.
 
Last edited:
"debunking9/11.com is a very sophisticated, extensive and professionally put together website that clearly has had a lot of expensive expertise poured into it." - Alex Jones' InfoWars

Journal Of Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Volume 1 Issue 4 is out!

eSkeptic gives Debunking911.com a nod ~

How Skeptics Confronted 9/11 Denialism

by John Ray

...Yet, in just under four years, the 9/11 “truth movement” has ground to a halt. Apart from the fundamental incoherence of their theories, the downfall of the 9/11 denier juggernaut was good old-fashioned skepticism at its finest, the kind that conjures visions of James Randi challenging psychics and faith healers on their home turfs and winning. Skeptics are better at their jobs than they think, and its important to give credit where credit is due.

Staking their fortunes almost solely on Internet-based content may have been the 9/11 deniers’ biggest mistake. What seems like a perfect place for pseudoscience — the Internet is un-edited, without fact-checkers or minimum publishing standards of any kind — also became a perfect place for a rapid-response system of blogs and forums to fight back. Drawing on the freely available technical information from the NIST, FEMA, and academic journals which most colleges let their students access for free, skeptical sites like ScrewLooseChange.blogspot.com and debunking911.com are able to defuse 9/11 denier claims as they arise..


http://www.debunking911.com/
 
Architect Magazine: Architects Shy From Truther 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
From Architect Magazine, this recent article on the distance the American Institute of Architects wisely puts between Richard Gage and AE911Truth:

What is more interesting than these bizarre and debunked conspiracy theories is the way that Gage places his AIA membership front and center in his presentations. He seems to be attempting to cloak his organization in the officialdom of the venerable 155-year-old professional institution, even as AIA wants nothing to do with his organization. At the start of his latest film, he explains that he is “a licensed architect of over 20 years and member of the American Institute of Architects.”

Gage often seems to wield his AIA status in promoting his conspiracy theories. In making his case, he also regularly cites that more than 100 AIA members and at least six AIA Fellows have signed his petition calling for a new investigation. In total, Gage says that more than 1,700 of the petition’s roughly 16,000 signatures are from architects and engineers.

During the screening, Gage was at the very least intimating that his organization had been invited to AIA officially.

…Aside from Gage, though, there was not a single other architect in the room, much less an official from AIA, or even another member. The 80-strong crowd was made up largely of members of the local 9/11 Truth movement and other political activists.

There is and never will be an AIA endorsement of these foolish and anti-rational theories of Richard Gage and AE911Truth. Buyer, beware.

It was rather nice of the author to point out the borderline anti-Semitic theories of some of Gage’s followers, theories that Gage only half-heartedly holds away from himself and AE911Truth. Can’t bite the hand that feeds you, right, Richard?

July 26, 2012 · Joseph Nobles · Comments Closed
Tags: AIA, Richard Gage, Scott Frank · Posted in: AE911Truth

Fantastic Engineering Basics Course from Teaching Company
Everybody needs some product placement in today’s world, right?

Well, instead of sending cash to AE911Truth and their buddies, why not spend some money and actually learn something about how buildings work?

The Teaching Company’s Great Courses are something I’ve enjoyed several of. Now they’ve released an engineering basics course that quite good. It’s called Understanding the World’s Greatest Structures: Science and Innovation from Antiquity to Modernity, and it’s taught by Stephen Ressler, an instructor at West Point. Boy, you can’t get any more government-sponsored than that, can you?

I’m on lecture 7 now, as Ressler works his way through the six basic structural pieces. Yes, he will eventually get to the World Trade Center buildings and even discuss their collapse, which I’m looking forward to. But he’s such a great instructor that you’ll be impressed by a late 19th century British textile mill as easily as the Brooklyn Bridge or the Great Pyramid of Giza. He occasionally wades out into the deep water, but not so far as to get completely esoteric. It’s true: the better your advanced math skills, the more you will get out of it (I also recommend the Great Course calculus fundamentals class). But you don’t have to know trigonometry to appreciate the way structures have grown and innovated over the years.

Anyone interested in the controlled demolition theories of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth will benefit immensely from this course. And if it’s full price, just wait a couple of months. They always put every course on sale throughout the year at some point. But it’s worth full price if you’ve got the room on your Visa!

March 28, 2012 · Joseph Nobles · Comments Closed
Posted in: Shoutout

Independent Study Confirms Red/Gray Chips in WTC Dust NOT Thermite
A thread at the James Randi Educational Foundation has previewed a new paper done by an accredited forensic scientist. After extensive study of the WTC dust and red-gray particles found within it, Dr. James Millette has conclusively demonstrated that the particles are not thermite in any shape, form, or function.

The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments.

There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

The red layer is an epoxy resin containing primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments. Paint, in other words. The gray layer is the carbon steel.

Many thanks to Chris Mohr who went out on his own to get this work done.

March 27, 2012 · Joseph Nobles · Comments Closed
Posted in: AE911Truth's Arguments

Hey, wha’ happened?
See, I leave this place alone for a long while and crazy things happen. Sorry about the broken site. I’ve no idea how long it was up, but it’s fixed now.

September 8, 2011 · Joseph Nobles · 2 Comments
Posted in: Uncategorized

ATM Paper Reviewer: “Perhaps Victims on Planes Alive in Tahiti”
Pat Curley over at the Screw Loose Change blog points us toward the identity of a reviewer of the “Active Thermitic Material” paper touted by the 9/11 Truth Movement and AE911Truth. It’s David L. Griscom, who revealed his identity on September 11 of this year, and as Curley shows us, he has had some interesting notions about how the 9/11 attacks went down:

I envision a similar 9/11 scheme, but one where the passengers boarded under their true names. Indeed, the seat occupancies on all four aircraft allegedly hijacked on 9/11 were very much lower that industry average (averaging 26% of capacity vis-à-vis 71% for all domestic flights in July 2001). So, here I extend my “all passengers survived” postulate to all four 9/11 “hijacked” flights on the notion that this small number of passengers might have been considered by conspirators as the minimum number for public credulity, while at the same time not exceeding the maximum number of “true believers in the cause” willing to accept long separations from their loved ones (sweetened by handsome Swiss bank accounts).

Griscom shows a predilection toward loopy theories, as his revelatory blog post links to Jim Hoffman’s ceiling tile theory as a “very plausible scenario” of how the *therm*te could have gotten into the building.

It’s Stephen Jones’ reaction that is the most illuminating to me.

As one of the authors of this paper, I can say that Prof. Griscom’s twelve pages of review were very well thought-out and required us to do considerable further work on the paper, which improved the final version significantly. This was one tough review, more challenging than any other review I have received, excepting perhaps peer-reviews of papers in Scientific American (1987) and Nature (1989) on which I was co-author. I should also add that I have never met Prof. Griscom personally and that I just learned of his blog disclosing himself as a peer-reviewer today (thanks to Dirk Gerhardt).

And yet Griscom says that he couldn’t find anything to criticize about the ATM paper! 12 notes of suggestions he has that makes Harrit, et al. sweat and strain to meet (according to Jones), but none of these are criticisms? Just like the 9/11 Truth employs the famous Hush-a-Boom *therm*te whenever they wish to argue for explosive sounds or against them, we now have peer review that’s both rigorous and non-critical at the same time.

The bias of this “referee” of the ATM paper is palpable. Jones says that he has never “met” Griscom, nor knew explicitly that Griscom was a reviewer of the piece, but the Bentley Open review process allows, indeed requests, that authors suggest reviewers for the piece. Jones has not categorically denied that Griscom was not one of the suggested reviewers by the authors of the paper, and I’m afraid such a categorical denial is required in this case. If it turns out that Jones and Griscom have communicated over the Internet, or if Griscom is well-known by other authors of the paper (like Harrit) and was suggested by them, this will be another blow to the objectivity of the review process beyond what has already been revealed.

And here’s an idea! Why not have Griscom release his 12 pages of suggestions so that we can examine this rigorous non-critical review? It certainly would be interesting to read over.

(Please note: the term *therm*te is my own to keep from having to type out every iteration of thermite 9/11 Truth advocates employ in what I interprest as their shell game. We’ve seen nanothermite, super nanothermite, regular thermite, thermate, etc. It gets old qualifying every single statement about the thermite arguments.)

December 3, 2010 · Joseph Nobles · 2 Comments
Tags: ATM Paper, David Griscom, Jim Hoffman, living victims, Peer Review, Screw Loose Change, Steven Jones, Thermite · Posted in: AE911Truth, Other 9/11 Truth Advocates

Harley Guy Identified, Full Interview Now Available


One of AE911Truth’s key talking points is a suggestion that the official story was inserted into the media with the use of people like this person. He’s called the Harley Guy because of his T-shirt, and his very vivid and precise way of describing the attack is seen as suspicious. However, only a short clip of this interview has ever been displayed by AE911Truth or other 9/11 Truth advocates.

Now the full interview is available, and Harley Guy is identified as Matt Walsh, a “freelancer for Fox.” So this is a person who has thought very carefully about how to describe the event he just witnessed because he works in the video news business and knows what is expected. His interview sounds like a sound bite because he works with sound bites all the time. There is nothing remotely suspicious about this, and suggestions that Mr. Walsh is a government plant dishing out the official story to fool the world are ludicrous.

ETA: A quick note – Mr. Walsh is used in the AE911Truth presentation. He’s part of the first 911Mysteries clip. As I recall, he’s also been used in other AE911Truth short videos, and that recently, like at the National Press Club vanity mock debate. I’ll check into it.

November 30, 2010 · Joseph Nobles · 2 Comments
Tags: 911Mysteries, cherrypicking, government did it, Harley Guy, Twin Towers · Posted in: AE911Truth, Common Myths

$75,450
Richard Gage’s salary in 2009 from Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. That’s according to the 2009 Form 990-EZ available right now at Guidestar.org, an online organization that helps track non-profits.

The total revenue for 2009 – $344,570. Salaries for Gage and others topped out at $107,417. That means salaries constitute 31% of AE911Truth’s expenses.

In other words, Richard Gage’s salary is 21% of all revenue received by AE911Truth in 2009.

I’ll post a more detailed analysis of this (and the 2008 Form 990-EZ) later.

ETA: My detailed look at the 2007 Form 990-EZ for AE911Truth is available at the link.

November 9, 2010 · Joseph Nobles · 9 Comments
Tags: Form 990, Richard Gage · Posted in: AE911Truth

Oh, No


Thanks to Orphia Nay at JREF!

November 9, 2010 · Joseph Nobles · Comments Closed
Tags: BuildingWhat? · Posted in: Uncategorized, WTC 7

Building What Ads Hitting the Air
A post at Democratic Underground says that the Building What? ad just played on MSNBC. So here’s a couple of links at my site dealing with the issues raised at their site:

Building What is Up! – and it looks like a lie on every page.

7 Facts about Building 7 – and how cherrypicking gets you the answer you want every time.

Of course these family members deserve answers to their questions. However, they don’t deserve the answers that they prefer. We owe it to all the victims of the 9/11 attacks to deal with the truth, and the presentations of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and this front group simply are not dealing with the truth. Deception and craft followed by a way to donate money to promoting more deception and craft doesn’t honor anyone’s memory.

November 2, 2010 · Joseph Nobles · One Comment
Posted in: Other 9/11 Truth Advocates, WTC 7

Another Quick One
The Texas State Fair is happening, and Civilization 5 keeps calling.

Meanwhile, NIST updated their FAQ about the WTC 7 investigation. Here’s one of the additions:

In June 2009, NIST began releasing documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the International Center for 9/11 Studies for “all of the photographs and videos collected, reviewed, cited or in any other way used by NIST during its investigation of the World Trade Center building collapses.” One of the items released, a video obtained from NBC News , shows World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) in the moments before it collapsed, then cuts to the collapse already in progress, with the building’s east penthouse “disappearing” from the scene (as it had already fallen in the intervening time). Other videos of the WTC 7 collapse show the penthouse falling first, followed by the rest of the building. Did NIST edit the NBC News video to remove the collapse of the penthouse?

The video footage released under the FOIA request was copied from the original video exactly as it was received from NBC News, with video documentation of the WTC 7 east penthouse collapse missing. The footage was not edited in any way by NIST.

This was something that I’d referred to before. Allegations from the 9/11 Truth movement that NIST is trying to hide the east penthouse are ludicrous. It has been everything debunkers could do to get 9/11 Truth advocates to even acknowledge that the east penthouse is a part of the actual collapse. Now suddenly that some in the movement think they can prove NIST shenanigans, this video is being used as evidence that the east penthouse is being covered up. Please, let’s discuss the east penthouse and the role it played in figuring out what happened to Building 7, Truth Movement!



http://ae911truth.info/wordpress/
 
"debunking9/11.com is a very sophisticated, extensive and professionally put together website that clearly has had a lot of expensive expertise poured into it." - Alex Jones' InfoWars

Journal Of Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories Volume 1 Issue 4 is out!

eSkeptic gives Debunking911.com a nod ~

How Skeptics Confronted 9/11 Denialism

by John Ray

...Yet, in just under four years, the 9/11 “truth movement” has ground to a halt. Apart from the fundamental incoherence of their theories, the downfall of the 9/11 denier juggernaut was good old-fashioned skepticism at its finest, the kind that conjures visions of James Randi challenging psychics and faith healers on their home turfs and winning. Skeptics are better at their jobs than they think, and its important to give credit where credit is due.

Staking their fortunes almost solely on Internet-based content may have been the 9/11 deniers’ biggest mistake. What seems like a perfect place for pseudoscience — the Internet is un-edited, without fact-checkers or minimum publishing standards of any kind — also became a perfect place for a rapid-response system of blogs and forums to fight back. Drawing on the freely available technical information from the NIST, FEMA, and academic journals which most colleges let their students access for free, skeptical sites like ScrewLooseChange.blogspot.com and debunking911.com are able to defuse 9/11 denier claims as they arise..


http://www.debunking911.com/

You're trolling

Stop it.
 
From the first slide show on, a video of the Philips building demolition in Oslo, Norway has been a prominent part of the AE911Truth slide show presentation:


This building has perhaps been selected for its similar shape to 7 World Trade, though Building 7 was 47 stories high and the Oslo building was only 15. This camera angle is also similar to one of the more recognized videos of Building 7 falling:

Obviously AE911Truth is inviting comparison between the Philips building demolition and the collapse of 7 World Trade. But there’s a peculiar thing about its Philips building video. The audio on the video is unlike any other recording of this demolition available on YouTube.

Hear for yourself. The current location of this video on the AE911Truth website is Slide 29. Go there and listen to the audio a couple of times.

Now here are four other videos of the same collapse with audio intact.


n every one of the YouTube videos, the sounds of the explosives can be clearly heard before the sound of the collapsing building. The last one is quite long (detailing the prep work for controlled demolitions), but right at the end the building goes down — and this cameraperson is so far back, only the sound of the explosives are heard!

The sounds of explosives are missing from the AE911Truth video.

This is something that has been brought to AE911Truth’s attention before. This website and many others continued to hold this out as an example of AE911Truth using tampered audio to deceive their audiences. Finally, it began using only the video with the audio removed. Now, as you can hear with your own ears, the audio without explosives has once again begun accompanying the AE911Truth video.

This is not good for AE911Truth’s reputation any way you look at it. At worst, this is outright fraud discovered, abandoned, and then returned to when the group thought no one was looking. At best, the group appears to have discovered and used the muddiest possible audio recording of this demolition possible. But this is not dreadful luck on its part. There are plenty of these videos about for its use with much better audio. So it still stands guilty of having abandoned this faulty video and returned to it, knowing its defects.

It’s in the use of this video that AE911Truth’s manipulation of its audiences becomes clear. In earlier tapes of this presentation, Richard Gage would speak as this video (and audio) looped again and again. By conditioning his audience with a faulty audio connected to an unmistakable controlled demolition, Gage was preparing his audience to hear the videos of the World Trade Center building collapses, videos which are also notable for having a lack of the sharp reports of explosives heard on the YouTube videos of the Philips building demolition. This website has no information on if any current AE911Truth speaker is using this audio in this manner, but use it they must.

And even under the best case scenario, consider this: when faced with clear evidence of this faulty audio, the group did not think to itself, “This video has no sounds of explosives which are in other Philips building videos, so the only sounds on this video are of the collapsing building. Since the WTC collapses sound a lot like this faulty video, it must be because the WTC videos only capture the sound of a collapsing building as well.” No, AE911Truth did not rethink its assumptions when showed that its evidence was faulty.

It bided its time.

So this, then, is the tenth mistake that AE911Truth continues to make: The group thinks that its watchdogs will give up and that it will be left alone to offer its wares without scrutiny. Sorry, folks. Be sure your sins will find you out.


http://ae911truth.info/wordpress/topten/oslo-demolition/
 
And this is relevant to what exactly?

Didn't bother reading it. I learned that from you.

Don't bother responding to that question.

You're on IGNORE.
 
And this is relevant to what exactly?

Don't bother responding to that question.

You're on IGNORE.


So much for bravado, and silly conspiracy theories then.......



ps: And I'm sure there's plenty here that have had you on ignore from day one!
 
What I've done here looks like spamming but when greeted by someone who admits he refuses to read what I type what else can I do. The reputation of this forum will be taken to other forum and discussed. You will go on a long list of Government sponsored disinformation forums. .



Silly childish threats!



If you genuinely want to get to the bottom of this then at least come back with any rebuttal information.

If you don't people like me will be in your face until we get a new inquiry. So you might as well respond.
.



Another threat???


But as I said earlier, name calling only makes me think you have no reasoned argument and that only emboldens me.




You mean like your childish bullying tactics in your first couple of posts?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top