Ex-CIA Pilot - No Planes Hit The Twin Towers


Status
Not open for further replies.
They have yet to post a 'start to finish' alternative as the alternative segments they suggest tend to contradict one another.

I'm constantly staggered by the 'evidence' offered up by the conspiracy 'theorists'.

The use of CGI to fool us in to thinking planes hit the towers is the best yet, by far. That's the one CT claim I always chuckle at whenever I see it on video or read it.

No explanation at all on how this cgi footage was filmed simultaneously by different news agency's and witnesses and from a multitude of different angles - just it's cgi :lol:

Like I said, staggering.
 
That all depends what you think you mean by the word "theory". Everything somebody just makes up isn't a theory.
Is it not possible that a missile could be fired at the pentagon causing damage, are you aware of some form of force-field the pentagon wields? Are you a wizard? It is speculation of the possibility, whether it is fact or not is irrelevant; for what it's worth I don't believe a missile hit the pentagon, I firmly believe it was the dildo in Austin Powers returning from orbit that caused such damage, the bodies were just seamen.
 
Well i could say you keep getting commercial planes and missiles mixed up but wont. What I will say is you cant answer my two simple questions so have swerved them, never mind eh?

ill go through it with you step by step and just you if you want but it'll need to wait until the weekend now as it burns up too much time. and without slanging and name calling as it detracts from the craic.

you want to start at what I believe hit the twin towers yes?
 
Right, this isnt a wind up, and im actually going to take the CT'S opinions seriously (well at least with an open mind). It seems the vast majority of those who think 9/11 was an inside job think the pentagon was hit by a missile, not flight 77. Okay, Im gonna ask the following questions to see if I can at least see how they can come to this conclusion.

1. Okay, if it was done by the government, then we must presume all of the attacks were, including the towers. So if they are capable of having planes hit the towers (we ALL saw planes hit the towers), why opt for a missile instead of another one of these planes and risk blowing the whole thing?

2. Did anyone actually report seeing a missile? Plenty reported seeing a plane. Im not aware anyone saw a missile (there is a quote that was used when someone said the plane flew like a missile, to make it look like the said it was a missile, but im not aware of anything esle)? Where would it have been launched from?

3. If it was a missile, how did body parts, a plane seat, bits of plane (landing gear) end up the crash site? If we are presuming they were planted there, planted by who? And why didnt anyone see anyone planting stuff?

4. Where did the hijacked flight 77 really go? (are we to presume the gov had pilots in on it to at least land the thing elsewhere safely and for the passengers to be secretly killed?)

5. How comes no one at air traffic control noticed the 'swap'? and instead tracked what they 'thought' was flight 77 all the way to the pentagon? (Must have been a good swap mid air with the missile mind for that switch to llok seamless - and for the missile to take on flight 77s code to fool air traffic control).
 
1. Okay, if it was done by the government, then we must presume all of the attacks were, including the towers. So if they are capable of having planes hit the towers (we ALL saw planes hit the towers), why opt for a missile instead of another one of these planes and risk blowing the whole thing?

Not really, no need to assume that at all.
Perhaps they had wind the 911 attack would happen on the twin towers, or perhaps as soon as it happened they realised they had a golden opportunity to do something naughty.

An attack on the pentagon could be used to focus americans to show it was an attack against the heart of the countries military etc in order to justify war and harsher control of citizens through knee jerk type acceptance of terrorism laws.

Perhaps also the missing 2.3 trillion the pentagon could not account for at the time had something to do with the fact the area that was hit held accoutants/budget planners/military spending records etc.
Who knows, perhaps it was just terrorists and a fragile seat survived intact with some floor attached after hitting a re-inforced building at 500 miles an hour head on.....

2. Did anyone actually report seeing a missile? Plenty reported seeing a plane. Im not aware anyone saw a missile (there is a quote that was used when someone said the plane flew like a missile, to make it look like the said it was a missile, but im not aware of anything esle)? Where would it have been launched from?

Perhaps it was not missile, perhaps it was a wall breach combined with explosives.
Perhaps it was a drone, perhaps it was a missile, or a plane - no idea.
Missiles could be easily launched from a mobile launcher surely, a wall breach + eplosives could have been done on site.

3. If it was a missile, how did body parts, a plane seat, bits of plane (landing gear) end up the crash site? If we are presuming they were planted there, planted by who? And why didnt anyone see anyone planting stuff?

I thought most people /media were kept at a distance due to the amount of confidential stuff that went all over the place?
Also the media etc would have taken time to arrive.
No one would have noticed anything until the bang occured anyway, just workmen working on renovating the building..

4. Where did the hijacked flight 77 really go? (are we to presume the gov had pilots in on it to at least land the thing elsewhere safely and for the passengers to be secretly killed?)
Who knows, governments have killed people before, I am sure they will again, I fail to see why people think it is beyond a government to kill its own people for its own ends.

5. How comes no one at air traffic control noticed the 'swap'? and instead tracked what they 'thought' was flight 77 all the way to the pentagon? (Must have been a good swap mid air with the missile mind for that switch to llok seamless - and for the missile to take on flight 77s code to fool air traffic control).

Air traffic controllers may be under orders to keep silent.
Air traffic control machines might have been fed false data perhaps.
Codes / transponders etc can be faked.
 
Not really, no need to assume that at all.
Perhaps they had wind the 911 attack would happen on the twin towers, or perhaps as soon as it happened they realised they had a golden opportunity to do something naughty.

An attack on the pentagon could be used to focus americans to show it was an attack against the heart of the countries military etc in order to justify war and harsher control of citizens through knee jerk type acceptance of terrorism laws.

Perhaps also the missing 2.3 trillion the pentagon could not account for at the time had something to do with the fact the area that was hit held accoutants/budget planners/military spending records etc.
Who knows, perhaps it was just terrorists and a fragile seat survived intact with some floor attached after hitting a re-inforced building at 500 miles an hour head on.....



Perhaps it was not missile, perhaps it was a wall breach combined with explosives.
Perhaps it was a drone, perhaps it was a missile, or a plane - no idea.
Missiles could be easily launched from a mobile launcher surely, a wall breach + eplosives could have been done on site.



I thought most people /media were kept at a distance due to the amount of confidential stuff that went all over the place?
Also the media etc would have taken time to arrive.
No one would have noticed anything until the bang occured anyway, just workmen working on renovating the building..


Who knows, governments have killed people before, I am sure they will again, I fail to see why people think it is beyond a government to kill its own people for its own ends.



Air traffic controllers may be under orders to keep silent.
Air traffic control machines might have been fed false data perhaps.
Codes / transponders etc can be faked.

And what about all independent witnesses who saw the plane?

Governments do bad things. But not all bad things are done by governments.

To ignore the overwhelming mass of evidence pointing directly to an event in line with the official version, yet be willing to consider a range of vague half rambling hypotheses, shows that identifying the truth isn't your main motivation here.
 
Perhaps they had wind the 911 attack would happen on the twin towers, or perhaps as soon as it happened they realised they had a golden opportunity to do something naughty.

:lol::lol:

"Shit! Sir, two planes just crashed into the World Trade Centre."

"Quick, this is too good an opportunity to miss. Let's hijack a 757, kill everyone on board and hide the plane somewhere, disguise a missile as a 757 so well that it fools the hundreds of people who are bound to see it flying over a densely populated area and air-traffic controllers who will think it's still the plane which we hid, fly the missile into the Pentagon, surreptitiously scatter bits of the actual 757 and body parts from all the people we killed around the crash site in front of the media without them noticing. Reckon we can knock all that up in about an hour?"
 
:lol::lol:

"Shit! Sir, two planes just crashed into the World Trade Centre"

"Quick, this is too good an opportunity to miss. Let's hijack a 757 that's already in mid-air, kill everyone on board and hide the plane somewhere, disguise a missile as a 757 so well that it fools the hundreds of people who are bound to see it flying over a densely populated area and air-traffic controllers who will think it's still the plane which we hid, fly the missile into the Pentagon, surreptitiously scatter bits of the actual 757 and body parts from all the people we killed around the crash site in front of the media without them noticing. Reckon we can knock all that up in about an hour?"
Corrected it for truth.
 
Not really, no need to assume that at all.
Perhaps they had wind the 911 attack would happen on the twin towers, or perhaps as soon as it happened they realised they had a golden opportunity to do something naughty.

An attack on the pentagon could be used to focus americans to show it was an attack against the heart of the countries military etc in order to justify war and harsher control of citizens through knee jerk type acceptance of terrorism laws.

Perhaps also the missing 2.3 trillion the pentagon could not account for at the time had something to do with the fact the area that was hit held accoutants/budget planners/military spending records etc.
Who knows, perhaps it was just terrorists and a fragile seat survived intact with some floor attached after hitting a re-inforced building at 500 miles an hour head on.....



Perhaps it was not missile, perhaps it was a wall breach combined with explosives.
Perhaps it was a drone, perhaps it was a missile, or a plane - no idea.
Missiles could be easily launched from a mobile launcher surely, a wall breach + eplosives could have been done on site.



I thought most people /media were kept at a distance due to the amount of confidential stuff that went all over the place?
Also the media etc would have taken time to arrive.
No one would have noticed anything until the bang occured anyway, just workmen working on renovating the building..


Who knows, governments have killed people before, I am sure they will again, I fail to see why people think it is beyond a government to kill its own people for its own ends.



Air traffic controllers may be under orders to keep silent.
Air traffic control machines might have been fed false data perhaps.
Codes / transponders etc can be faked.

Cheers for answering. Well I would find all that hard to believe tbh, but I guess technically i cannot 100% rule it out.

Some of the main points Id focus on are

1. The seat bring found. Im not sure why people focus too much on that. Many plane crashes see large parts of planes reduced to nothing whilst items or clothing, seats and belongings are found without a single scratch on them.

2. Are we really saying the government decided to join with the terrorists? You have suggested (i know you havent said you def think so) that after the second tower was hit the gov saw an opportunity to strike the pentagon. That wouldnt really work would it as Flight 77 will already have been well into its flight, and the gov will have needed the person who took off to be in on it to make the switch and land the plane elsewhere.

:lol::lol:

"Shit! Sir, two planes just crashed into the World Trade Centre."

"Quick, this is too good an opportunity to miss. Let's hijack a 757, kill everyone on board and hide the plane somewhere, disguise a missile as a 757 so well that it fools the hundreds of people who are bound to see it flying over a densely populated area and air-traffic controllers who will think it's still the plane which we hid, fly the missile into the Pentagon, surreptitiously scatter bits of the actual 757 and body parts from all the people we killed around the crash site in front of the media without them noticing. Reckon we can knock all that up in about an hour?"

Ow man, Im trying to at least find out/see where they are coming from :lol:

Can I also ask, would a better video of a plane hitting the pentagon silence the doubters? I ask as many of those doubting the pentagon continue to doubt commercial planes hit the towers.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps also the missing 2.3 trillion the pentagon could not account for at the time had something to do with the fact the area that was hit held accoutants/budget planners/military spending records etc.

:lol: The entire US federal budget in 2001 was about $1.8trillion, the Pentagon's total assets amounted to $600billion. One government branch managing to lose far more money than it has ever possessed, and more than the total government spend is some achievement.

The $2.3trillion figure dates from a report into the Pentagon's finances in 1999, issued by its then Chief Finance Inspector. It refers to various accounting errors and adjustments, not actual money which had gone missing. The figure is so high because in an organisation so large, and whose finances had become so chaotic that one accounting error of, say, $10,000 would be repeated and duplicated through every department's accounts it went through and it could on its own cause hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of such errors . Blindly parroting the "missing $2.3trillion" line is another example of people swallowing - totally unquestioningly - something they have read elsewhere which is misinterpreted to begin with; often the same people, of course, who accuse the rest of us of being naive sheeple.
 
Cheers for answering. Well I would find all that hard to believe tbh, but I guess technically i cannot 100% rule it out.

Some of the main points Id focus on are

1. The seat bring found. Im not sure why people focus too much on that. Many plane crashes see large parts of planes reduced to nothing whilst items or clothing, seats and belongings are found without a single scratch on them.

2. Are we really saying the government decided to join with the terrorists? You have suggested (i know you havent said you def think so) that after the second tower was hit the gov saw an opportunity to strike the pentagon. That wouldnt really work would it as Flight 77 will already have been well into its flight, and the gov will have needed the person who took off to be in on it to make the switch and land the plane elsewhere.



Ow man, Im trying to at least find out/see where they are coming from :lol:

Can I also ask, would a better video of a plane hitting the pentagon silence the doubters? I ask as many of those doubting the pentagon continue to doubt commercial planes hit the towers.

Perhaps they already had people on certain flights if they suspected the twin towers attack was going to happen soon (didnt someone say they had been warned but ignored it? no idea about that though). Perhaps it was an air marshal.
Of course the fact two people made phone calls is harder to explain away, unless they were part of it which is unlikely - so its likely something did occur on the plane itself. (uness they never happened, and people are lying about the calls.)
What I find hard to understand, apart from the seat, is that it apparently flew very very low down over residential area's for quite some time - how come not one person said wow thats low down and whipped out their phone to record it? (or did they? would be good if someone had)
Also quite handy it was in a area of 'reduced' radar coverage so no one knows where/what actually went on radar wise for some of the time.
Is there any landing strips that could be viable in that area of 'reduced' radar coverage where they lost contact radar wise completly with the plane?

As for footage being released, it might help a liittle but its way to late - after all this time they could have produced some impressive fake footage - the time to release the footage was at the time of the event, not years after.

:lol: The entire US federal budget in 2001 was about $1.8trillion, the Pentagon's total assets amounted to $600billion. One government branch managing to lose far more money than it has ever possessed, and more than the total government spend is some achievement.

The $2.3trillion figure dates from a report into the Pentagon's finances in 1999, issued by its then Chief Finance Inspector. It refers to various accounting errors and adjustments, not actual money which had gone missing. The figure is so high because in an organisation so large, and whose finances had become so chaotic that one accounting error of, say, $10,000 would be repeated and duplicated through every department's accounts it went through and it could on its own cause hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of such errors . Blindly parroting the "missing $2.3trillion" line is another example of people swallowing - totally unquestioningly - something they have read elsewhere which is misinterpreted to begin with; often the same people, of course, who accuse the rest of us of being naive sheeple.

Perhaps someone in the pentagon heard the 2.3 trillion, misinterpreted and panicked....
Perhaps if not 2.3 trillion there was maybe still a significant sum of money that had been mis-spent or lost/stolen. Perhaps someone wanted to destroy the records.
Guess we will never know what was destroyed, seeing as it was secretive to begin with..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Perhaps someone in the pentagon heard the 2.3 trillion, misinterpreted and panicked....
Perhaps if not 2.3 trillion there was maybe still a significant sum of money that had been mis-spent or lost/stolen. Perhaps someone wanted to destroy the records.
Guess we will never know what was destroyed, seeing as it was secretive to begin with..

Two points.

First, I picked up on your “$2.8trillion” claim as one example of something which has happened hundreds of times on these threads. People who think there’s something in the various conspiracy theories are always accusing the rest of us of accepting things too easily, yet are constantly happening across some load of rubbish on a CT website and unthinkingly believing it to be true. The “missing 2.8trillion dollars” is a perfect example, a simple five second google would have shown it to be nonsense, but instead you accepted it so readily that you were prepared to post it as fact in support of your argument.

Secondly, the accounting errors are indeed used by CTs to claim that this is why the Pentagon would attack itself i.e. to cover it up and keep these errors hidden from the public, but it is only public knowledge in the first place because the Pentagon told everybody about it in a public report (Pentagon's finances in disarray, Associated Press 03/03/00) published 18 months prior to 9/11.
 
Two points.

First, I picked up on your “$2.8trillion” claim as one example of something which has happened hundreds of times on these threads. People who think there’s something in the various conspiracy theories are always accusing the rest of us of accepting things too easily, yet constantly happen across some load of rubbish on a CT website and unthinkingly believe it to be true. The “missing 2.8trillion dollars” is a perfect example, a simple five second google would have shown it to be nonsense, but instead you accepted it so readily that you were prepared to post it as fact in support of your argument.

Secondly, the accounting errors are indeed used by CTs to claim that this is why the Pentagon would attack itself i.e. to cover it up and keep these errors hidden from the public, but it is only public knowledge in the first place because the Pentagon told everybody about it in a public report (Pentagon's finances in disarray, Associated Press 03/03/00) published 18 months prior to 9/11.

But as I said, maybe someone at the pentagon shit themselves when it was announced that money was missing - then fearing a huge audit/investigation decided to destroy the people/records who could shed light on something they had done illegally.
Only an idea...
 
Perhaps they already had people on certain flights if they suspected the twin towers attack was going to happen soon (didnt someone say they had been warned but ignored it? no idea about that though). Perhaps it was an air marshal.
Of course the fact two people made phone calls is harder to explain away, unless they were part of it which is unlikely - so its likely something did occur on the plane itself. (uness they never happened, and people are lying about the calls.)
What I find hard to understand, apart from the seat, is that it apparently flew very very low down over residential area's for quite some time - how come not one person said wow thats low down and whipped out their phone to record it? (or did they? would be good if someone had)
Also quite handy it was in a area of 'reduced' radar coverage so no one knows where/what actually went on radar wise for some of the time.
Is there any landing strips that could be viable in that area of 'reduced' radar coverage where they lost contact radar wise completly with the plane?

As for footage being released, it might help a liittle but its way to late - after all this time they could have produced some impressive fake footage - the time to release the footage was at the time of the event, not years after.



Perhaps someone in the pentagon heard the 2.3 trillion, misinterpreted and panicked....
Perhaps if not 2.3 trillion there was maybe still a significant sum of money that had been mis-spent or lost/stolen. Perhaps someone wanted to destroy the records.
Guess we will never know what was destroyed, seeing as it was secretive to begin with..

Why the lack of phone video footage of the Pentagon plane? How common were video phones then? And how quickly do low flying jets pass over head?
 
But as I said, maybe someone at the pentagon shit themselves when it was announced that money was missing - then fearing a huge audit/investigation decided to destroy the people/records who could shed light on something they had done illegally.
Only an idea...

"Sir, all these records reveal our dodgy accounting methods. Shall I shred them?"

"No, let's hope that there is a huge terrorist attack soon which we can use as cover to hijack a 757 that's already in mid-air, kill everyone on board and hide the plane somewhere, disguise a missile as a 757 so well that it fools the hundreds of people who are bound to see it flying over a densely populated area and air-traffic controllers who will think it's still the plane which we hid, fly the missile into the Pentagon, surreptitiously scatter bits of the actual 757 and body parts from all the people we killed around the crash site in front of the media without them noticing."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top