Was 9/11 a conspiracy??

Created by djhixx on Oct 13, 2007

54,256 votes

Click on an option to vote

yes

no

well, im not sure

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#249108 Dec 14, 2012
Insults Are Easier wrote:
<quoted text>Heres a cracker.

I guess you can stop sniffing glue next week.

Insults Are Easier
Steel plating?

(Chrome flavoured of course!)

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#249109 Dec 14, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>What's even more amazing is how hundreds of people could all be involved in such a massive criminal plot with no motive whatsoever.
Don't forget the seven degrees of separation...somewhere within that seven degrees is a Jew!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249110 Dec 14, 2012
Porkpie Hat wrote:
<quoted text>
Steel plating?
(Chrome flavoured of course!)
I heard if you use google Chrome you can take the cooling fans out of my computer.

It's true, I read it on the net.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#249111 Dec 14, 2012
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
So you can't answer this ...Still wondering about those 20 pilots that could not hit the broad side of a barn....... how do you know they exist and the story is real TWOOFER? Because you read it on the net?
I WIN BY DEFAULT!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry charlie you win by default!?!?!?!?!?
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha h
.
That's As Funny As Winning By Default huh eh !
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249112 Dec 14, 2012
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry charlie you win by default!?!?!?!?!?
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha h
.
That's As Funny As Winning By Default huh eh !
Says the kid that for some reason thinks jet fuel is funny, care to explain, thought not!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#249113 Dec 14, 2012
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>I heard if you use google Chrome you can take the cooling fans out of my computer.

It's true, I read it on the net.
Quoted for twoof!

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Edmonton, Canada

#249114 Dec 14, 2012
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>Says the kid that for some reason thinks jet fuel is funny, care to explain, thought not!
Now THAT'S funny!

“Bright Waters House ”

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#249115 Dec 14, 2012
without a doubt ...... I sometimes think I was the only guy not in on it !?!?!??!
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
He MUST be one of at least one-hundred co-conspirators and government shills. ;)

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#249116 Dec 14, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Friends, relatives, bystanders, security personnel, American Airlines ticket takers to name just a few.
2. You have failed to provide anything close to proof that Olsen's phone call was faked. Since it was made on her cell phone, I'm quite sure it was verified by telephone records.
3. Yes flight 77 was tracked, as well as other aircraft in the vicinity. How do you explain how it could have disappeared? Where did it go? It would have had to cross over land at a very low altitude to go out to sea. Someone would have seen it. Besides, the helicopter pilot and others saw it.
4. There was no time to intercept. It flew out of Washington Dulles airport just a short distance away.
5. The evidence was gathered and documented. There were investigators who also confirmed what they saw.
You are calling hundreds of people liars. What is the statistical chance that hundreds can all be colluding is a massive criminal act with no motive?
Sorry, you took one small clip and turned it into something other than what actually happened. None of the pieces fit. Have you ever considered how fast the plane was traveling and how slow video and digital photography was in 2001?
1. Friends, relatives, bystanders, security personnel, American Airlines ticket takers to name just a few.
.
Whom exactly? You have failed to provide any names.
.
2. You have failed to provide anything close to proof that Olsen's phone call was faked. Since it was made on her cell phone, I'm quite sure it was verified by telephone records.
.
What you are quite sure about is immaterial bwunker.
Provide some proof other than the 9/11 Ommission Report, the MIST Report, or the Pentgoboom Report. No one believes these bogus reports and they are not evidence.
.
3. Yes flight 77 was tracked, as well as other aircraft in the vicinity. How do you explain how it could have disappeared? Where did it go? It would have had to cross over land at a very low altitude to go out to sea. Someone would have seen it. Besides, the helicopter pilot and others saw it.
.
It landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport. Parked at a remote location and was quarantined off for a bomb threat inspection.
Do your own research bwunker.
.
4. There was no time to intercept. It flew out of Washington Dulles airport just a short distance away.
.
What flew out of Washington Dulles Airport?(It?)
.
5. The evidence was gathered and documented. There were investigators who also confirmed what they saw.
.
If there were any serial numbered parts, found in wreckage of the aircraft that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon, identified back to the aircraft in question, the FBI will not release that information for reasons of "National Security". YOu and no one else has ever seen it.
Now gee I wonder why they would want to do that? If they were in possession of any such parts, why are they not splashing it all over the media? Same thing goes for all the video cameras confiscated from many locations on the Pentagon and various businesses located around the Pentagon. No matter their technical specifications they could still show what did hit the Pentagon and this is why they were all taken.
.
What about the missile batteries at the Pentagon? Why wasn't whatever it was coming toward the Pentagon shot down?
.
You are calling hundreds of people liars. What is the statistical chance that hundreds can all be colluding is a massive criminal act with no motive?
.
I am also calling YOU a liar.
.
Sorry, you took one small clip and turned it into something other than what actually happened. None of the pieces fit.
.
Especially the Boeing 757 which could not fit into the 65' hole in the Pentagon which was not designed to stop a nuclear bomb like the F4 Phantom jet video.
.
Just like those union assholes in Detroit say, "you're pissing on history"
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha
.
Now That's A Funny JOKE HUH EH !
sad day

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#249117 Dec 14, 2012
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249118 Dec 14, 2012
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
2. You have failed to provide anything close to proof that Olsen's phone call was faked. Since it was made on her cell phone, I'm quite sure it was verified by telephone records.
Your claim, reasonable question, prove it, WATCH A WW win by DEFAULT!
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249119 Dec 14, 2012
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
It landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport. Parked at a remote location and was quarantined off for a bomb threat inspection.
Do your own research bwunker.
wrong

So what did land at Cleveland? It seems to have been Delta Flight 1989. This was initially misidentified as Flight 93, as reported here.

Air traffic controllers believed they had a hijacked plane in the air over Ohio on Sept. 11. They just didn't know which plane.

During tense moments that morning at Cleveland Air Route Traffic Control Center, the first guess was that Delta Flight 1989 was hijacked, not United Airlines Flight 93.

“We knew right away we had a problem. The first thought was, "Is that Delta 1989?'” said Rick Kettell, manager of the Federal Aviation Administration's busiest regional center.
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2002/08/15/l...

However there's no shortage of documentation online to show the planes real identity Here's an account from someone who was on the plane, for instance.

My husband] and I and six other fellow [...] employees were on the 8 am flight from Boston to Los Angeles on Tuesday, but we were on the Delta flight [1989], the one out of three 8am flights departing Logan that did not get hijacked. Instead, we were forced to make an emergency landing in Cleveland because there were reports that a bomb or hijacking was taking place on our plane. The pilot had radioed that there was suspicious activity in the cabin since one of the passengers was speaking urgently on his cellphone and ignored repeated flight attendant requests to stop using his cell phone while in flight. Also, there was an irregularity in the passenger manifest because there were two people [with the same middle eastern name] who were listed but only one aboard.
http://256.com/gray/thoughts/2001/20010912/19...

Other news stories give similar accounts:

No explosives were found aboard a Delta flight from Boston that was forced to land at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport because of fears it had been hijacked, city officials said.

The Federal Aviation Administration had been informed at 9:45 a.m. of a possible hijacking of a plane headed for Cleveland, said FBI spokesman Mark Bullock.

Flight 1989 to Los Angeles was not hijacked but was grounded by Delta because it was in the same flight pattern as a plane that was hijacked and struck the World Trade Center in New York, Bullock said.
http://thepost.baker.ohiou.edu/archives3/sep0...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249120 Dec 14, 2012
The Cleveland Free Times investigated the story, too, but found little support.

Rumor One: Cleveland Mayor Mike White told reporters that United 93 haD landed safely at Hopkins on 9/11.

Evidence For: At 11:43 a.m. the morning of 9/11, the following Associated Press news bulletin appeared on the Web site for Cincinnati ABC affiliate station WCPO, Channel 9: "A Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing Tuesday at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport due to concerns that it may have a bomb aboard, said Mayor Michael R. White. White said the plane had been moved to a secure area of the airport, and was evacuated. United identified the plane as Flight 93."...
Evidence Against: Former Mayor White hardly ever talks to the media now, so Free Times contacted his former press secretary Della Homenik.
"It has always been my understanding that United flight 93 diverted from its intended flight plan while it was in Cleveland air space," Homenik writes in an e-mail. "I never heard a single report, from any source, either on September 11 or in its aftermath, that flight 93 landed in Cleveland."

A review of WEWS Cleveland Channel 5's live coverage of White's comments that day show that he never suggested that the grounded plane parked at the end of a Hopkins runway was United 93.
"Let me walk through the most current situation that we are grappling with," says White at the brief press conference. "At this moment, we have a Boeing 767 in a secure area of Hopkins International Airport. The initial reports were that this plane was hijacked and that there was a bomb on board. There was, before this, an additional plane in our airspace. I am told through unconfirmed reports that we could hear screaming in the control tower. This plane has been diverted from Cleveland and at last report was in the Toledo airspace."
Later, we would learn that this 767 was Delta flight 1989. It had originated from the same Boston airport as United 93, but was cleared by inspectors after landing at Hopkins. It had not been hijacked, and there was no bomb. And United 93, by the way, was a 757...

Rumor Two: United 93 deboarded at NASA Glenn Research Center and its passengers were taken away in an unmarked shuttle.
Evidence For: Newspaper articles published after 9/11 suggest there were two planes, not one, that were forced to land in Cleveland. One was Delta 1989. The other is often referred to as "Flight X" but is assumed by many to be United 93.
The Web site 911review.org cites real articles from the Plain Dealer, Akron Beacon Journal and USA Today to establish these facts:

> A plane landed in Cleveland at 10:10 a.m.

> Delta 1989 landed here at 10:45 a.m., and its 69 passengers and nine crew members were loaded onto buses and taken to Federal Aviation Administration headquarters at Hopkins.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249122 Dec 14, 2012
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>

What about the missile batteries at the Pentagon? Why wasn't whatever it was coming toward the Pentagon shot down?
There were none

Our first problem with this idea is that we've never, ever, at any point seen a reference to show that these missile batteries exist. Why no photos, no stories about them? Plainly they wouldn’t want to give away some details, but it makes little sense to keep them entirely secret, because surely the whole point of such batteries would be to act as a deterrent?

Second, if they did exist then wouldn’t you have expected Pentagon employees to also have raised this question? Or are we supposed to believe they’re all “in on it”, even those whose friends were killed in the attack?

After raising this point there has been a claim that the existence of these missile systems have been confirmed by April Gallop:

Me: Do you have any theory about how a Boeing 757 could have hit such a secure building without any anti-aircraft defenses being activated or any warning alarms sounded?

AG: I have thought about this very question numerous times. And then I realized I needed to rephrase the question. The real question is what is the probability or likelihood that no anti-aircraft defense, warning alarms or additional security mechanism functioned on that particular day?

And then we need to think how likely is it then there was a glitch in all the security mechanisms, anti-aircraft defense and warning alarms?

You know, it takes a while to get around that building. And I remember being so disgusted at the frequency of random drill exercises taking place for us to evacuate the building. It seemed as if they always happened when I had to take care of certain things.

Yet on September 11th, the day when our lives were threatened, not one alarm.

Me: I would imagine that security procedures are different now than they were prior to 9/11, so I don't think you would be revealing any confidential information by answering this question. I have heard that, as of 9/11, the anti-aircraft batteries were automated, in other words, that they would have automatically fired against any incoming aircraft that did not transmit the appropriate friend or foe signal. Is that true?

AG: Yes that is true. They are either to attempt to guide the incoming aircraft that has violated the airspace to a safe location to land. Making reasonable effort to guide it down. Or shoot it down.
http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2006/07/...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249123 Dec 14, 2012
However, in the last part Gallop appears to be talking about using fighters, not missiles, which won’t “guide” the incoming aircraft anywhere. And she’s not confirming an automatic shoot-down of anything that “violated the airspace”, which is probably just as well.

Why? Third, the Pentagon is located very close to the approach for Washingtons Ronald Reagan airport, as you can see in these photos. Note the arrowed runway in the background of the first shot.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249124 Dec 14, 2012
And fifth, the Pentagon did use armed missile batteries in Washington during September 2002, and reports at the time made it clear that this was an exceptional event.

Pentagon arms missile batteries around D.C.

For the first time since the Cuban missile crisis almost 40 years ago, armed missile launchers will be protecting the nation's capital by day's end Tuesday -- a precaution that comes amid a heightened alert status on the eve of the one-year anniversary of the September 11 attacks.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/09/10/ar911.a...

No mention of any earlier Pentagon missile batteries here. Some confirmation comes in Richard Clarke’s “Against All Enemies”, where he says plans for air defence were rejected (the dates of these events aren’t made precisely clear, but the account comes from a chapter entitled “The Almost War, 1996):
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#249125 Dec 14, 2012
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Especially the Boeing 757 which could not fit into the 65' hole in the Pentagon which was not designed to stop a nuclear bomb like the F4 Phantom jet video.
That hole is far larger than the fuselage, what, did you expect the wings to go through reinforced concrete?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#249126 Dec 14, 2012
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Friends, relatives, bystanders, security personnel, American Airlines ticket takers to name just a few.
.
Whom exactly? You have failed to provide any names.
.
2. You have failed to provide anything close to proof that Olsen's phone call was faked. Since it was made on her cell phone, I'm quite sure it was verified by telephone records.
.
What you are quite sure about is immaterial bwunker.
Provide some proof other than the 9/11 Ommission Report, the MIST Report, or the Pentgoboom Report. No one believes these bogus reports and they are not evidence.
.
3. Yes flight 77 was tracked, as well as other aircraft in the vicinity. How do you explain how it could have disappeared? Where did it go? It would have had to cross over land at a very low altitude to go out to sea. Someone would have seen it. Besides, the helicopter pilot and others saw it.
.
It landed at Cleveland Hopkins Airport. Parked at a remote location and was quarantined off for a bomb threat inspection.
Do your own research bwunker.
.
4. There was no time to intercept. It flew out of Washington Dulles airport just a short distance away.
.
What flew out of Washington Dulles Airport?(It?)
.
5. The evidence was gathered and documented. There were investigators who also confirmed what they saw.
.
If there were any serial numbered parts, found in wreckage of the aircraft that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon, identified back to the aircraft in question, the FBI will not release that information for reasons of "National Security". YOu and no one else has ever seen it.
Now gee I wonder why they would want to do that? If they were in possession of any such parts, why are they not splashing it all over the media? Same thing goes for all the video cameras confiscated from many locations on the Pentagon and various businesses located around the Pentagon. No matter their technical specifications they could still show what did hit the Pentagon and this is why they were all taken.
.
What about the missile batteries at the Pentagon? Why wasn't whatever it was coming toward the Pentagon shot down?
.
You are calling hundreds of people liars. What is the statistical chance that hundreds can all be colluding is a massive criminal act with no motive?
.
I am also calling YOU a liar.
.
Sorry, you took one small clip and turned it into something other than what actually happened. None of the pieces fit.
.
Especially the Boeing 757 which could not fit into the 65' hole in the Pentagon which was not designed to stop a nuclear bomb like the F4 Phantom jet video.
.
Just like those union assholes in Detroit say, "you're pissing on history"
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha
.
Now That's A Funny JOKE HUH EH !
1. You must be kidding me. I'm sure many were interviewed along with American Airlines staff. Are you totally daft?

2. Olsen made the phone call according to the investigation and the answering machine. It is up to you to prove otherwise. I believe the reports. Why should I not believe those reports?

3. BS. Flight 77 took off from Washington Dulles and was tracked all the way to the target by radar and witnesses. That Cleveland crap is total nonsense.

4. Flight 77 flew out of Washington Dulles Airport according to hundreds of witnesses dummy.

5. How many parts remain intact when an aircraft hits a solid wall at over 500mph? You are dreaming. They recovered the flight recorder dummy.

I can't help it if you wish to believe fairy tales without any evidence or motive.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#249127 Dec 14, 2012
Charlie Sheen wrote:
<quoted text>
Your claim, reasonable question, prove it, WATCH A WW win by DEFAULT!
The bwunkers always claim they "WIN" by DEFAULT. Never by a preponderance of the available evidunce as they describe it.

All the bwunkers on this forum have to back them up is the 9/11 Ommission Report, the MIST Report, or the Pentgoboom Report. All fabricated, junk science, chock full of omissions of relevant information. And the reports conveniently end just at the point when the buildings start to fall down, so they don't have to explain any more than what led up to the collapse.
And then the cute saying "probable collapse sequence" which is a government way of saying we really don't know, so this is what we think "probably" happened.
.
The bwunkers can think they WIN. So what? They think they are playing a game to be "WON". How childishly narcissistic is that?
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha ha ha
.
A Good Joke By The Official Perps On The American Public (see my pic) But Really Doesn't Get That Hot huh eh !

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#249128 Dec 14, 2012
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
The bwunkers always claim they "WIN" by DEFAULT. Never by a preponderance of the available evidunce as they describe it.
All the bwunkers on this forum have to back them up is the 9/11 Ommission Report, the MIST Report, or the Pentgoboom Report. All fabricated, junk science, chock full of omissions of relevant information. And the reports conveniently end just at the point when the buildings start to fall down, so they don't have to explain any more than what led up to the collapse.
And then the cute saying "probable collapse sequence" which is a government way of saying we really don't know, so this is what we think "probably" happened.
.
The bwunkers can think they WIN. So what? They think they are playing a game to be "WON". How childishly narcissistic is that?
.
Jet Fuel ha ha ha ha ha ha
.
A Good Joke By The Official Perps On The American Public (see my pic) But Really Doesn't Get That Hot huh eh !
Cast of thousands huh?

You must be kidding.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 min Stilgar Fifrawi 816,742
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 16 min June VanDerMark 578,493
Stop the 2015 Recession Now -- before it’s too ... 23 min Protester 3
Any son's ever see there mom's having sex with ... 39 min Rainman 8
News Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 50 min AN NFL FAN 121,441
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 1 hr Ben ACCF KING 5,677
Poll Are you sick of seeing interracial dating ads? (Jul '08) 1 hr Ben ACCF KING 41
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 3 hr trifecta1 609,696
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 6 hr bacon hater 97,929
The World Will End On May 21, 2011 (Aug '08) 20 hr THE BIG SHERIFF 16,484
More from around the web