Serious question for right wing folks

[OregonSmock]

Couldn't care less about Obama and where he was born.

But I always find it fascinating how dismissive people are of anyone who raises legit questions.   Popular Mechanics or Science also thought Area 51 moved to an abandoned DOD missile range in Utah.   People literally walk in and out of the place every day, there's nothing there but empty buildings and tumbleweeds.  And no, I don't think they have Aliens at Area 51, it's just a fascinating place because you know they're working on some really funky $hit, and they literally fly in the workers from a terminal at McCarren in Las Vegas on a DOD owned airline code named "Janet" . . . some people just simply can't grasp how massive our countries military complex is, and how many billions get spent every year on black projects.  

There's plenty of legit questions around 9-11.   Guys that flunked out of flight schools that can peform in airliner at a level that takes the most experienced pilots years to master.   Most experts understand that there's no way AQ pulled off an operation like 9-11 without the help of a state sanctioned intelligence agency.  Plus ask yourself, where can you trace the roots of AQ to??  Well, to the United States and the CIA that's who.   We started the f_ckers back when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan.    The former lead investigator of AQ dies on his 2nd day on the job, on 9-11 as the head of security at the WTC complex.   The guy resigned from the FBI because he kept getting stone walled by internal forces everytime he was about to get something really juicy on AQ . . . why is that??  He dies in the freaking WTC on 9-11 . . . oh yeah, just another coincidence.  

But hey, never question, always believe what the government tells you.  Sure, an ex marine with an old piece of $hit italian military rifle blew the president of the United States head off from hundreds of feet away while the pres was in a moving vechicle . . . right.  Oh, but he was trained to shoot in the marines . . . sure he was, trainied to shoot precision made firearms, not piece of $hit bolt action rifles.   Those are the kinds of shots it takes years to master using precision made and sighted in weapons, not piece of $hit Italian rifles.    

I could see the 9/11 terrorists being hired by the United States military, but I don't know how anyone can say that people didn't die that day on Flight 93 and on the plane that hit the Pentagon.  There were accounts of people on Flight 93 calling their loved ones right before the plane crashed.  Those people are dead.  Now, whether or not the terrorists were working for the US government is another story.

[ben ji]

Meh, still not a big conspiracy theory guy. In time the truth always comes out because people love to talk...

[sonofdaxjones]

Ben I didn't say anything about Flight 93??

Yes Ben Ji in time the truth does come out.  Like the Gulf Tonkin "incident" in time it was realized that U.S. ships were likely shooting at phantoms, but it got blown up into North Vietnamese ships attacking American Ships and 10 years later 53,000 Americans were dead. 

Also, do a little research on the history of Brown & Root (Haliburton) and LBJ. 

[OregonSmock]

Ben I didn't say anything about Flight 93??

Yes Ben Ji in time the truth does come out.  Like the Gulf Tonkin "incident" in time it was realized that U.S. ships were likely shooting at phantoms, but it got blown up into North Vietnamese ships attacking American Ships and 10 years later 53,000 Americans were dead. 

Also, do a little research on the history of Brown & Root (Haliburton) and LBJ. 

No, but it seemed like you were backing up pike, who did have doubts about whether or not Flight 93 actually existed, and whether or not a plane hit the Pentagon.   

[Goldbrick]

Cass Sunstein, who is Obama's Information Czar, wrote a paper in 2008 about how the government should handle conspiracy theories. Here is the abstract:

Abstract: Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. Such theories typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy. Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.

He neglects to mention, as do many others, that conspiracies do indeed actually happen in real life.

[pike]

What was the Govt's motive for blowing up the World Trade Towers?

Should this thread be merged with the Birth Certificate thread into one large  type thread?

 

Dude, you need to do some research

[pike]

Ben I didn't say anything about Flight 93??

Yes Ben Ji in time the truth does come out.  Like the Gulf Tonkin "incident" in time it was realized that U.S. ships were likely shooting at phantoms, but it got blown up into North Vietnamese ships attacking American Ships and 10 years later 53,000 Americans were dead.  

Also, do a little research on the history of Brown & Root (Haliburton) and LBJ.  

No, but it seemed like you were backing up pike, who did have doubts about whether or not Flight 93 actually existed, and whether or not a plane hit the Pentagon.    

I mean I'm skeptical on this. It's just amazing that a plane so large would leave hardly any wreckage at either site, and there's no video of either one, and there's no black box (but they "found" the terrorists' head bands and stuff :jerkoff: )

It's just very fishy. Not to mention one of the guys on Flight 93 called his mom and was like, "Hey mom, this is...(then he says his first name and last name)"

So wtf knows what happened. Did the government make up all the "passengers" on these "flights"? - Maybe, like i've said they've lied BIG before and there's nothing from stopping them from doing it again.

Edit: Also, phone calls can't be received from an altitude as high as they were. That's an inescapable fact. Very, very fishy.

[mortons toe]

[sonofdaxjones]

There's very little doubt by most that it was a 757 that hit the Pentagon, the issue many have is , that as they like to say, was some $hit hot flying going on, not the kind of flying you get from fly school rejects.

Albeit some of the witnesses say it was more like a Gulfstream sized jet. 

[pike]

There's very little doubt by most that it was a 757 that hit the Pentagon, the issue many have is , that as they like to say, was some $hit hot flying going on, not the kind of flying you get from fly school rejects.

Albeit some of the witnesses say it was more like a Gulfstream sized jet. 

Exactly. How crap flying despite what sized the jet, but like I said I'm skeptical that a 757 hit the pentagon.

[_33]

There's very little doubt by most that it was a 757 that hit the Pentagon, the issue many have is , that as they like to say, was some $hit hot flying going on, not the kind of flying you get from fly school rejects.

Does it really take some "hot $hit" flying to run a plane into something?  I thought it took "hot $hit" flying to avoid running into something?

[WillieWatanabe]

I really don't have much of an opinion on all these conspiracy theories. However, how many people, roughly, are "in" on these "jobs"?? It would just seem someone, somewhere, wouldn't be able to keep their mouth shut, i dunno, maybe i'm wrong.

Plus, I also wouldn't like living my life wondering if some CIA dude would knock on my door, ask if I go by Pike, then make me disappear. If they covered up 9/11, why wouldn't they cover YOU up. IMHO.

[ben ji]

I really don't have much of an opinion on all these conspiracy theories. However, how many people, roughly, are "in" on these "jobs"?? It would just seem someone, somewhere, wouldn't be able to keep their mouth shut, i dunno, maybe i'm wrong.

Plus, I also wouldn't like living my life wondering if some CIA dude would knock on my door, ask if I go by Pike, then make me disappear. If they covered up 9/11, why wouldn't they cover YOU up. IMHO.

Exactly why I dont believe in any big theorys

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I think we are all used to viewing plane crashes and wreckage in which the pilots are trying "not to crash", ie, low throttle and flaps fully extended. In these 3 cases, the pilots are in full throttle dives, probably reaching speeds that are nearly the speed of sound. There is going to be very little recognizable wreckage after a collision with a building at those speeds. JMO.

[OregonSmock]

I think we are all used to viewing plane crashes and wreckage in which the pilots are trying "not to crash", ie, low throttle and flaps fully extended. In these 3 cases, the pilots are in full throttle dives, probably reaching speeds that are nearly the speed of sound. There is going to be very little recognizable wreckage after a collision with a building at those speeds. JMO.

Very good point.

[pike]

I think we are all used to viewing plane crashes and wreckage in which the pilots are trying "not to crash", ie, low throttle and flaps fully extended. In these 3 cases, the pilots are in full throttle dives, probably reaching speeds that are nearly the speed of sound. There is going to be very little recognizable wreckage after a collision with a building at those speeds. JMO.

Very good point.

Now just explain how a flight school drop out was able to do that and make such a precise hit

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I think we are all used to viewing plane crashes and wreckage in which the pilots are trying "not to crash", ie, low throttle and flaps fully extended. In these 3 cases, the pilots are in full throttle dives, probably reaching speeds that are nearly the speed of sound. There is going to be very little recognizable wreckage after a collision with a building at those speeds. JMO.

Very good point.

Now just explain how a flight school drop out was able to do that and make such a precise hit

Microsoft Flight Simulator?

[WillieWatanabe]

I think we are all used to viewing plane crashes and wreckage in which the pilots are trying "not to crash", ie, low throttle and flaps fully extended. In these 3 cases, the pilots are in full throttle dives, probably reaching speeds that are nearly the speed of sound. There is going to be very little recognizable wreckage after a collision with a building at those speeds. JMO.

Very good point.

Now just explain how a flight school drop out was able to do that and make such a precise hit

Ever seen Airplane?? Auto-pilot. duh.

[pike]

Flight sim and auto pilot? LOL at you guys

[pike]

These guys couldn't even fly a single engine Cessna

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

These guys couldn't even fly a single engine Cessna

If you recall, their instructors stated that they weren't particularly interested in learning to take off or land, just in-flight control.

[michigancat]

I think we are all used to viewing plane crashes and wreckage in which the pilots are trying "not to crash", ie, low throttle and flaps fully extended. In these 3 cases, the pilots are in full throttle dives, probably reaching speeds that are nearly the speed of sound. There is going to be very little recognizable wreckage after a collision with a building at those speeds. JMO.

Very good point.

Now just explain how a flight school drop out was able to do that and make such a precise hit

dude isn't the pentagon like the largest office building in the world? 

[pike]

I think we are all used to viewing plane crashes and wreckage in which the pilots are trying "not to crash", ie, low throttle and flaps fully extended. In these 3 cases, the pilots are in full throttle dives, probably reaching speeds that are nearly the speed of sound. There is going to be very little recognizable wreckage after a collision with a building at those speeds. JMO.

Very good point.

Now just explain how a flight school drop out was able to do that and make such a precise hit

dude isn't the pentagon like the largest office building in the world? 

Yeah, but to navigate a plane from 30k feet to hit the pentagon like it did is something that a flight school dropout couldn't do

[Cire]

I don't think the plane was at 30,000 feet was it?

[Dugout DickStone]

Getting a plane down to altitude, then hitting a huge, stationary target that is completely unobscured/totally visible when you don't intend on walking away is something a month or 2 flight student could do.

Flying by sight into the side of the Pentagon would not be much of a feat at all.