Conspiracy theories

[SteveSC]

Hi OB, first thing I do when reading things like this is check the reputation of the site. As this site seems like a right wing crock of nonsense, I then take any quotes from ‘professionals’ etc with a pinch of salt. I’m not sure if these pilots are real and if they are, I’d imagine they’ve been cherry picked to fit with the narrative of the story and publication.
As an aside, the main problem i have with 9/11 conspiracies is that i can’t see any reason why it should be an inside job. Like I said, the U.K. went to war largely on the back of a sexed up dossier.
It’s like if I find a hole dug in my garden. It looks like an animal hole, I mean it could have been my neighbour I guess, but why would she dig that hole. The animal would use it for sleep and protection. Not really sure what the neighbour would use it for therefore I am not going to pursue this train of thought or investigate further.
Also, just to alleviate everyone’s concerns, there is no hole in my garden. Just some empty Skol cans and a supermarket trolley

Like I said on the previous page. Look at the guy who wrote it too and did the videos. He honestly believes humans are controlled by Aliens.

He over uses the fact he worked as a contract pilot for the CIA to gian credibility. Only he says he worked for the CIA which he didn't. He flew CIA officials.

It seems like every few years we get these types coming back to try talk down what people witnessed. What people felt etc....

I remember distinctly watching planes fly into the buildings from different angles from various news agencies and independent folks filming.

I also like many others have friends and over the years colleagues who witnessed it or who worked the scene.

There were many ways the US could have got people on their side to go to war. Heck they fooled nations with the whole WMD thing. That didn't cost any lives and was pretty effective.

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Like I said on the previous page. Look at the guy who wrote it too and did the videos. He honestly believes humans are controlled by Aliens.

He over uses the fact he worked as a contract pilot for the CIA to gian credibility. Only he says he worked for the CIA which he didn't. He flew CIA officials.

It seems like every few years we get these types coming back to try talk down what people witnessed. What people felt etc....

I remember distinctly watching planes fly into the buildings from different angles from various news agencies and independent folks filming.

I also like many others have friends and over the years colleagues who witnessed it or who worked the scene.

There were many ways the US could have got people on their side to go to war. Heck they fooled nations with the whole WMD thing. That didn't cost any lives and was pretty effective.

Yeah I largely agree. A thing that winds me up about al lthis is that after the attack, responders were told by agencies that the air was safe to breathe, when it wasn’t. At all.

Redirect Notice

This is a real injustice. it might not be as exciting as planes/ missiles flying into buildings. You won’t hear any badly researched podcasts on the subject but it clearly happened causing huge suffering and loss.

 

[SteveSC]

Yeah I largely agree. A thing that winds me up about al lthis is that after the attack, responders were told by agencies that the air was safe to breathe, when it wasn’t. At all.

Redirect Notice

This is a real injustice. it might not be as exciting as planes/ missiles flying into buildings. You won’t hear any badly researched podcasts on the subject but it clearly happened causing huge suffering and loss.

Yeah agree 100% a past colleague of mine from Staten Island lost his father to health issues. It was a result of being a first responder in the aftermath and not the actual event. He developed lung issues and passed away several years later.

 

[WA Toffee]

I thought it was generally accepted that the twin towers was an "inside job" by the US government.

I thought it was generally accepted to be a terrorist attack

 

[JimmyJeffers]

Yeah agree 100% a past colleague of mine from Staten Island lost his father to health issues. It was a result of being a first responder in the aftermath and not the actual event. He developed lung issues and passed away several years later.

This is the issue I have with many conspiracy theories. They deflect from proven injustices.

 

[davids]

Exactly. 9/11 would require thousands and thousands of complicit accomplices, who would need to maintain a strict narrative for what would now be 19 years.

I read the article and I always ask this question: can you confirm if the evidence provided (images etc.) is genuine without manipulation or editing?

If it's so clearly a fake with blatant evidence, why do countries such as Russia, China, NK and many others with their resources not expose it to the world?

If not, why are they complicit? Soon, you're onto Rothschild and Illuminati nonsense with a spiralling narrative, which goes back to how to keep it so rigid.

Just like with the Moon Landings.

The Alex Jones's of this world have made millions out of stirring the conspiracy pot. Covid has been a windfall for these people.

 

[Old Blue 2]

But then, in his article he does state that an "aluminium ballon" would be instantly crushed by the force of a 10000 tonne concrete structure.

I know he also claims that there should be lots of debris because the planes are so big and bits would fall off.

It does seem that he is changing logic part way through the article depending on what he wants the answer to be.

The aluminium would be demolished by would not disappear...

 

[JimmyJeffers]

The Alex Jones's of this world have made millions out of stirring the conspiracy pot. Covid has been a windfall for these people.

He is lower than scum. The very worst. Imagine making your money by peddling a conspiracy theory involving dead children. Should be locked up.

 

[WA Toffee]

The aluminium would be demolished by would not disappear...

who said it disappeared?

 

[Old Blue 2]

Hi OB, first thing I do when reading things like this is check the reputation of the site. As this site seems like a right wing crock of nonsense, I then take any quotes from ‘professionals’ etc with a pinch of salt. I’m not sure if these pilots are real and if they are, I’d imagine they’ve been cherry picked to fit with the narrative of the story and publication.
As an aside, the main problem i have with 9/11 conspiracies is that i can’t see any reason why it should be an inside job. Like I said, the U.K. went to war largely on the back of a sexed up dossier.
It’s like if I find a hole dug in my garden. It looks like an animal hole, I mean it could have been my neighbour I guess, but why would she dig that hole. The animal would use it for sleep and protection. Not really sure what the neighbour would use it for therefore I am not going to pursue this train of thought or investigate further.
Also, just to alleviate everyone’s concerns, there is no hole in my garden. Just some empty Skol cans and a supermarket trolley

It's about the content, Jimmy, not the site.

It's about supposed terrorists having only ever flown single-engined 'Piper Cub' type of aircraft climbing into the cockpit of a 7-series Boeing, flying it at 500+ mph, and carrying out manoeuvres that simply cannot be done, as evidenced not only by the pilots in that article, but a whole shoal of them in posts on Youtube from those in 'Pilots for truth'. THAT is the square that cannot be circled.

Have you spoken to pilots regarding the types they have flown, and their handling characteristics? What they can and can not do? I have.

Have you studied photos of crashed aircraft? Looked at the resulting debris? And then looked at the Pentagon debris? Or Flight 93?

I'm looking for a sensible debate here, not simply dissing the organ upon which the article is put up on.

And the UK went to war piggy-backing the USA on the false WMD premise, for which Bliar should be eternally ashamed of...

 

[magicjuan]

I get that, but there would have been far less destructive ways to achieve it, and that's ignoring the elaborate planning and execution required to destroy 2 sky scrapers in a densely populated city while making it look like a terrorist attack.

People are not that intelligent. There would've been plenty of discrepancies in the narrative and people would talk, especially considering how many people would need to be involved in such a conspiracy.

Case in point: the assassination attempt in Salisbury. Was pretty much immediately identified as a plot. A website (not even a government intelligence agency) exposed who the people were within months. And that was only a few people involved.

Salisbury? Have you looked into that? Reported as the most deadly substance yadda yadda so they put a copper outside the door they were supposed to have contaminated by, before all the forensics, his hazmat stuff was a copper's helmet and a whistle

 

[JimmyJeffers]

It's about the content, Jimmy, not the site.

It's about supposed terrorists having only ever flown single-engined 'Piper Cub' type of aircraft climbing into the cockpit of a 7-series Boeing, flying it at 500+ mph, and carrying out manoeuvres that simply cannot be done, as evidenced not only by the pilots in that article, but a whole shoal of them in posts on Youtube from those in 'Pilots for truth'. THAT is the square that cannot be circled.

Have you spoken to pilots regarding the types they have flown, and their handling characteristics? What they can and can not do? I have.

Have you studied photos of crashed aircraft? Looked at the resulting debris? And then looked at the Pentagon debris? Or Flight 93?

I'm looking for a sensible debate here, not simply dissing the organ upon which the article is put up on.

And the UK went to war piggy-backing the USA on the false WMD premise, for which Bliar should be eternally ashamed of...

The content and the site can not be separated in my opinion. The language and sources they use are all focussed on a single narrative and therefore are largely discredited by bias.
I’m not going to lie, I know little about the logistics of flying into buildings, but I wouldn’t try to educate myself on the subject through watching YouTube videos. I have a mate who’s a pilot, I’ll ask him and get him to admit to those pesky chem trails while I’m at it.

 

[Old Blue 2]

With regards to the Twin Towers, I wonder how the government was able to convince the hundreds if not thousands of people who saw said planes hit to lie?

The Pentagon could be a s slightly different issue, but knowing a person who was in NY at the time and watched it unfold I wonder who convinced them.


No, no it's not.

I think the more pertinent point re the aircraft that hit the twin towers is: that witnesses close enough said the aircraft were a single overall colour (grey) with no airline livery on them at all. That kind of honest stating of the facts by ordinary citizens is difficult to 'bat away'.

Also, there was an unidentified fairing under the central fuselage of the second aircraft, such that would not be seen on a commercial airliner.

Then there is the whole 'collapsing on its own footprint' with regard to not only the two main twin towers, but tower 7.

 

[Old Blue 2]

The content and the site can not be separated in my opinion. The language and sources they use are all focussed on a single narrative and therefore are largely discredited by bias.
I’m not going to lie, I know little about the logistics of flying into buildings, but I wouldn’t try to educate myself on the subject through watching YouTube videos. I have a mate who’s a pilot, I’ll ask him and get him to admit to those pesky chem trails while I’m at it.

Well, going back to my previous post, and your lack of answers to the points I put to you, I have spoken to, interviewed many pilots over the decades, and what they have told me flies in the face of anyone ever pulling off the manoeuvres that those Boeing 7-series supposedly did.

Open your mind Jimmy, to all of the possibilities. Governments rely on people accepting what they spoon-feed to them.

Another thing: passengers on Flight 93 supposedly phoned their loved ones on mobiles when at 20,000-30,000 feet. The mobile phone technology in September 2001 was not capable of transmitting signals from such height. Experts in that field did actuals tests to prove it was false.

There is too much garbage that has been fed to the public over this event, and you (i.e. everyone) have to have an open mind about it all.

 

[Lanolin]

I think the more pertinent point re the aircraft that hit the twin towers is: that witnesses close enough said the aircraft were a single overall colour (grey) with no airline livery on them at all. That kind of honest stating of the facts by ordinary citizens is difficult to 'bat away'.

Also, there was an unidentified fairing under the central fuselage of the second aircraft, such that would not be seen on a commercial airliner.

Then there is the whole 'collapsing on its own footprint' with regard to not only the two main twin towers, but tower 7.

Do you not ask yourself how a government could come up with a scheme so brilliant that it fools the entire population of the world - bar a couple of thousand absolute crackpots - and orchestrates everything so well that the thousands of people involved all keep silent about it for 20 years afterwards, but couldn't arrange to put airline livery on the plane they were using? Come on man, just think for one second.