Ex-CIA Pilot - No Planes Hit The Twin Towers


Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd be leaning more toward controlled demolition as the buildings fell at the speed of gravity, as in the towers offered no resistance to the collapse, this strikes me as mighty strange. Especially considering the amount of structural steel involved, logic would say that it would slow the collapse slightly. I think quite a few eminent engineers and scientists think along similar lines but the tinfoil hat brigade get the press from the debunkers.
We'll overlook that gravity is an acceleration not a speed, but in fact if you look a bit more closely you will see debris falling alongside the towers much faster than the towers themselves descend.

So that's that one answered then.
 
They dont have to control the plane for long, nor worry about any damage to the plane or safety/comfort of passengers.
After all, its going to be ploughing straight into the side of a building in a minute or two's time...
Surely design speeds etc are in place to ensure no damage is done to plane/passenger safety - when you dont care about either you can exceed them surely.[DOUBLEPOST=1394553235][/DOUBLEPOST]

QUOTE]

This has been tried in simulators by inexperienced airliner pilots, non could do it(this was at the maximum speed of the simulator, the maximum speed of the planes in real life, not the speed the planes impacted the towers). In the 'official version' they had to take out the part of the simulator to get the planes to fly at the 'real speed' of impact, this removed the modelling of how crap the planes handle at high speed(an impossible speed) it is thought.
 
I'd be leaning more toward controlled demolition as the buildings fell at the speed of gravity, as in the towers offered no resistance to the collapse, this strikes me as mighty strange. Especially considering the amount of structural steel involved, logic would say that it would slow the collapse slightly. I think quite a few eminent engineers and scientists think along similar lines but the tinfoil hat brigade get the press from the debunkers.

So are you saying the planes we saw didn't fly into the buildings and then the US govt just gave enough time before setting off the collapse of the building by pushing a button. I definitely saw a plane fly in
 
I can't believe some of the shit people believe like.

I could start my own theory right now, putting loads of bollocks all over the internet, making fake recordings and basically just talking shit and I can guarantee that someone somewhere would believe it.
 
I'd be leaning more toward controlled demolition as the buildings fell at the speed of gravity, as in the towers offered no resistance to the collapse, this strikes me as mighty strange. Especially considering the amount of structural steel involved, logic would say that it would slow the collapse slightly. I think quite a few eminent engineers and scientists think along similar lines but the tinfoil hat brigade get the press from the debunkers.

Speed of gravity?

Anyway, I'm no architect, but I believe all the structural strength is based around the central core and the outer walls. If you drop a massive weight on top (i.e. the top 1/3 of one of the towers) there's very little inside to stop the collapse - certainly the internal floors won't help a lot. Going from recollection of the events, the buildings didn't drop as fast as, for instance, a controlled demolition. Obviously, however, the amount of smoke, debris in the pictures makes it very difficult to judge, and I haven't seen a film of the whole event from a single standpoint
 
I can't believe some of the shit people believe like.

I could start my own theory right now, putting loads of bollocks all over the internet, making fake recordings and basically just talking shit and I can guarantee that someone somewhere would believe it.

Probably someone (or more than one) on here. Paranoid fruit loops.
 
I can't believe some of the shit people believe like.

I could start my own theory right now, putting loads of bollocks all over the internet, making fake recordings and basically just talking shit and I can guarantee that someone somewhere would believe it.

Make it a film and a book, might as well make lots of money out of it...
 
I can't believe some of the shit people believe like.

I could start my own theory right now, putting loads of bollocks all over the internet, making fake recordings and basically just talking shit and I can guarantee that someone somewhere would believe it.

If you actually had an alternative theory you'd have one up on the rest of them.
 
:D Aye, OK
We'll overlook that gravity is an acceleration not a speed, but in fact if you look a bit more closely you will see debris falling alongside the towers much faster than the towers themselves descend.

So that's that one answered then.

Building 7? Check your facts!(it's in the 'official enquiry' that it free fell for 100ft)[DOUBLEPOST=1394558046][/DOUBLEPOST]
We'll overlook that gravity is an acceleration not a speed, but in fact if you look a bit more closely you will see debris falling alongside the towers much faster than the towers themselves descend.

So that's that one answered then.
With regards to the Twin Towers and your 'that's that one answered then' :)

Watch from 43 mins it seems the experts don't agree with you

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You have no idea do you? The amount of people killed in 9/11 pales into insignificance compared to the previous atrocities committed by the US govt.

No. So what? How does a coup from the fifties give credit to a conspiracy with no facts whatsoever, not one. Not one itty bitty little fact that cannot be debunked.

It appears your apparent dislike for the US is clouding any rational thought.
 
No. So what? How does a coup from the fifties give credit to a conspiracy with no facts whatsoever, not one. Not one itty bitty little fact that cannot be debunked.

It appears your apparent dislike for the US is clouding any rational thought.
It wasn't even that much of a coup as it was quite legal, it was the 'democratically elected' PM who was trying to do illegal stuff in order to boost his own power and remove the only check on said power.
 
The reality is that all this type of thread does is fuel my paranoia. Its quite disgusting to think, for example, that these wars are being fought to keep the US armaments industry going, line the pockets of the few and in the process destabalise countries resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people and soldiers. The problem is that I have no real idea what the solution is.

I can tell you - people have to stop co-operating in this madness , refuse military service - let the bastards at the so called top duke it out and leave the peaceful 99.99% of planet out of it
 
Only made it to page 18 so sorry if seb, but people asking for info on pre rigging etc, some canny interviews out there with WTC employees regarding power downs the weekend prior to the attack, with bomb sniffing dogs removed from the complex.

Just picking up yet another thing that gets quoted as 'fact'. 'Bomb sniffing dogs removed from the complex' implies they were all taken out. That's not true. One even died in the attack, and his handler was trapped in the rubble. There had been additional dogs brought in to check the building because of some phone threats - not uncommon I would guess. The dogs found nothing. The extra dogs were stood down - in other words, it returned to normal levels of security. And yet...everyone who will happily dismantle any aspect of the mainstream explanation happily repeats this uncritically. You can see it on this thread, over and over again.

I love a good conspiracy theory, and happily accept that governments will do some terrible things unchecked. But a kind of wild-eyed empty-brained acceptance of anything (jews! energy weapons!) actually helps governments, rather than hinder them, as when they do bad things the accurate sceptic who is getting at the truth is lost in the noise of the loons who will believe anything some nutter on Youtube claims.

Put the conspiracy theories to the same level of test and challenge you put the publicly accepted theory to. Then see what's left.
 
As i mentioned earlier in the thread there was a one hour gap between the first plane hitting the tower and a plane slamming into the Pentagon ! Now given the importance of the Pentagon and the fact that it was known there were multiple hijacked planes in the air i am truly amazed that any plane got anywhere near the Pentagon. I know Exile mentioned that there was an exercise going on on the day involving the military airforce i can not believe for a second that there was no aircover for Washington and New York or that there wasn't enough time to arm planes and get them airborne. There are fully armed planes waiting to be scrambled as a matter of course. The military had (and were on the day) trained for just such an eventuality of hijacked planes being used as weapons. I have read that there was confusion as to whether it was part of the exercise or "real life" but would have thought that after planes started going into the twin towers any confusion would have been over.
The only planes ready were diverted to the coast closer to New York as the second plane that hit the tower was reported as still in the air and heading for Washington. Whether the person giving the orders knew it was a wild goose chase, or had been given info to act on I don't know. Nor do I know if there was info, whether the info was wrong on purpose or just a mistake/incompetance in the confusion.
 
one factor we seem to be ignoring here is in the title of the thread - the person spouting this theory is a "ex" CIA pilot - has it occurred to anyone that maybe he`s not so ex CIA and he is still on payroll , spreading disinformation and hence damaging the whole quest to find out what really did happen that awful day?
 
one factor we seem to be ignoring here is in the title of the thread - the person spouting this theory is a "ex" CIA pilot - has it occurred to anyone that maybe he`s not so ex CIA and he is still on payroll , spreading disinformation and hence damaging the whole quest to find out what really did happen that awful day?

This "ex" CIA pilot you're putting your faith in also believes that the US government is in regular contact with alien races, and that the dark side of moon has rivers, lakes, and an advanced civilisation living on it:


So it's not surprising you conspiracy loons are hanging on his every word. He's your perfect spokesman.
 
Watch from 43 mins it seems the experts don't agree with you

you in actual fact, of course, mean SOME experts don't agree with him.

I've avoided this thread for long enough, but one of my pet hates is people who believe in conspiracy theories, yet refuse to acknowledge that 'experts' also exist who offer totally different version, simply because they don't fit the version of events YOU want to believe.

People who believe in conspiracies, UFO's etc. should really re-appraise their stance. Because I have seen VERY few who are willing to take a look at ALL of the evidence, and produce a reasoned judgement. And just for once, try questioning the background behind some of the youtube videos people have posted on here. Who made them, for example? would they have an agenda? what exactly is their experience in the field they are supposedly 'experts' in? Youtube is an excellent platform, but it certainly isn't a reliable basis of information.
 
have you noticed it seems impossible for folk to say conspiracy without adding the world theory to it !!!! - like conspiracies never happen :)
 
have you noticed it seems impossible for folk to say conspiracy without adding the world theory to it !!!! - like conspiracies never happen :)

Everybody's at it mate - ParanoidMackem has taken to calling the official version of events a "theory".

Have you anything to say about the pilot John Lear's theories about advanced civilisations living on the moon, and how your belief in him reflects on the credibility of your own theories?
 
It wasn't even that much of a coup as it was quite legal, it was the 'democratically elected' PM who was trying to do illegal stuff in order to boost his own power and remove the only check on said power.
Hahaha, what on earth are you talking about you strange little man!

You're not seriously suggesting that CIA were the good guys are you?

No wait a minute, you actually don't have a clue about anything on the matter do you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top