POLL: 9/11 staged?

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: glugglug
Just to be clear on this, by "staged" I meant that the plane crashes were intentionally caused by those in power in this country, and had nothing to do with Al Quaeda. There is no question of whether the crashes actually happened or not, just the question of WHO masterminded them.

And so Bin Laden just figured, "What the hell, I might as well be video taped confessing to the entire plot, because I wish I had been behind it!"

 

[NeoV]

Flyer....are you saying that they were supposed to know that the planes would be flown into buildings? Have you taken into consideration that the two planes flown into the WTC were over populated areas for almost their entire flight?

At what point during the first two flights were officials sure the planes were hijacked anyway?

Can you really compare post 9-11 out of control/lost contact flights to pre-9/11 incidents? You may want to hate Bush, you may want to rant about 'Luciferian' governments...you may want to try some medication, also....

 

[tcsenter]

You don't have to believe me on this one, go pick up an '04 (or even '01 if you can find it) edition of the Federal Aviation Regulations and see for yourself. One can compare the timeline of 9/11 to other "out of control/contact aircraft" events within the last few years (check into the Payne Stewart incident for a comparison) and you'll see that the Government had more than enough time to prevent the events of that day.

I spent three months debunking this garbage in 2001~2002 and can certify you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

 

[Abhi]

Thats y i dont go to P&N..

I feel and laughing, crying and killing someone at the same time while reading threads there!

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: PipBoy

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3
I don't agree with what happened because of the official timeline of events of that day. There are Federal Aviation Regulations setup for just such an event (intercepting a plane believed to have been hijacked) and said FARs were in no way followed by the Government/Military/ARTCC/ATC on that day. There was more than enough time to have intercepted those planes, and yet nothing was done about them.

Please list the FAR that deals with intercepting commercial airliners. I have the 2004 copy right here and would like to know what you're talking about. I would also like some proof that they were violated.

I'll be more than happy to oblige you on that one. Give me a few minutes to find it in my '04 ASA FAR/AIM and you'll have your answer.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: glugglug
Just to be clear on this, by "staged" I meant that the plane crashes were intentionally caused by those in power in this country, and had nothing to do with Al Quaeda. There is no question of whether the crashes actually happened or not, just the question of WHO masterminded them.

And so Bin Laden just figured, "What the hell, I might as well be video taped confessing to the entire plot, because I wish I had been behind it!"

That is one very strong possibility. It's pretty much what they planned on happening in the Fox miniseries "The Lone Gunmen" from 2000 which dahunan linked in the other thread.

Another possibility to consider is that that is not Osama on those tapes. Ever see the movie "Simone"? That technology actually exists. There is a company that will create convincing computer CGI animations of anyone doing or saying anything, using 15 minutes of real video for the computer to learn that person's real speech patterns/gestural habits/etc. They have samples of bogus speeches given by CGI versions of Bush & Clinton. The actual intended market of the technology is not bogus political speeches however, it's marketed to Hollywood with a really high price tag for them to use if an actor dies while shooting a film. They can have a "vactor" fill in for him in whatever scenes weren't shot yet when he died.

I might have to dig up the link... BTW, yet another conspiracy theory: I think Bush may be using this technology to get out of making some of his speeches, particularly speeches about the economy. If you watch carefully you'll notice sometimes he goes 4-5 minutes without blinking. Most humans can't do that.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Flyer....are you saying that they were supposed to know that the planes would be flown into buildings? Have you taken into consideration that the two planes flown into the WTC were over populated areas for almost their entire flight?

At what point during the first two flights were officials sure the planes were hijacked anyway?

Can you really compare post 9-11 out of control/lost contact flights to pre-9/11 incidents? You may want to hate Bush, you may want to rant about 'Luciferian' governments...you may want to try some medication, also....

Here's the problem with your little pre and post 9/11 theory. There is virtually no difference in the FARs or procedures in place to deal with out of contact/out of control/believed to be hijacked aircraft! As soon as I can find the FARs dealing with this subject again I will show you what I'm talking about.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: glugglug
Just to be clear on this, by "staged" I meant that the plane crashes were intentionally caused by those in power in this country, and had nothing to do with Al Quaeda. There is no question of whether the crashes actually happened or not, just the question of WHO masterminded them.

And so Bin Laden just figured, "What the hell, I might as well be video taped confessing to the entire plot, because I wish I had been behind it!"

That is one very strong possibility. It's pretty much what they planned on happening in the Fox miniseries "The Lone Gunmen" from 2000 which dahunan linked in the other thread.

Another possibility to consider is that that is not Osama on those tapes. Ever see the movie "Simone"? That technology actually exists. There is a company that will create convincing computer CGI animations of anyone doing or saying anything, using 15 minutes of real video for the computer to learn that person's real speech patterns/gestural habits/etc. They have samples of bogus speeches given by CGI versions of Bush & Clinton. The actual intended market of the technology is not bogus political speeches however, it's marketed to Hollywood with a really high price tag for them to use if an actor dies while shooting a film. They can have a "vactor" fill in for him in whatever scenes weren't shot yet when he died.

I might have to dig up the link... BTW, yet another conspiracy theory: I think Bush may be using this technology to get out of making some of his speeches, particularly speeches about the economy. If you watch carefully you'll notice sometimes he goes 4-5 minutes without blinking. Most humans can't do that.

Revelation 13:15 "And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cuase that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed." Very interesting indeed......

 

[TommyVercetti]

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: glugglug
Just to be clear on this, by "staged" I meant that the plane crashes were intentionally caused by those in power in this country, and had nothing to do with Al Quaeda. There is no question of whether the crashes actually happened or not, just the question of WHO masterminded them.

And so Bin Laden just figured, "What the hell, I might as well be video taped confessing to the entire plot, because I wish I had been behind it!"

That is one very strong possibility. It's pretty much what they planned on happening in the Fox miniseries "The Lone Gunmen" from 2000 which dahunan linked in the other thread.

Another possibility to consider is that that is not Osama on those tapes. Ever see the movie "Simone"? That technology actually exists. There is a company that will create convincing computer CGI animations of anyone doing or saying anything, using 15 minutes of real video for the computer to learn that person's real speech patterns/gestural habits/etc. They have samples of bogus speeches given by CGI versions of Bush & Clinton. The actual intended market of the technology is not bogus political speeches however, it's marketed to Hollywood with a really high price tag for them to use if an actor dies while shooting a film. They can have a "vactor" fill in for him in whatever scenes weren't shot yet when he died.

I might have to dig up the link... BTW, yet another conspiracy theory: I think Bush may be using this technology to get out of making some of his speeches, particularly speeches about the economy. If you watch carefully you'll notice sometimes he goes 4-5 minutes without blinking. Most humans can't do that.

If you are going to make such out of this world comments about new technology, you better have some links to back you up.

 

[thomsbrain]

much as i dislike our current adminstration, i find that pretty hard to believe.

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: glugglug
Just to be clear on this, by "staged" I meant that the plane crashes were intentionally caused by those in power in this country, and had nothing to do with Al Quaeda. There is no question of whether the crashes actually happened or not, just the question of WHO masterminded them.

And so Bin Laden just figured, "What the hell, I might as well be video taped confessing to the entire plot, because I wish I had been behind it!"

That is one very strong possibility. It's pretty much what they planned on happening in the Fox miniseries "The Lone Gunmen" from 2000 which dahunan linked in the other thread.

Another possibility to consider is that that is not Osama on those tapes. Ever see the movie "Simone"? That technology actually exists. There is a company that will create convincing computer CGI animations of anyone doing or saying anything, using 15 minutes of real video for the computer to learn that person's real speech patterns. They have samples of bogus speeches given by CGI versions of Bush & Clinton. The actual intended market of the technology is not bogus political speeches however, it's marketed to Hollywood with a really high price tag for them to use if an actor dies while shooting a film. They can have a "vactor" fill in for him in whatever scenes weren't shot yet when he died.

I might have to dig up the link...

Ooo! The Fox Mini-Series! Well, that explains much.

I've seen S1mone, and Forrest Gump, and several other big-budget Hollywood films where the best digital effects artists on the globe try to manipulate the speech of others using cutting edge digital techniques. Only those with low double-digit IQ are fooled and cannot immediately tell the difference.

Certainly not a single recognized published authority on authenticity of video and photographic evidence agrees with you, but I'm sure you won't let that kind of thing stand in the way of your thinking.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Originally posted by: glugglug
Just to be clear on this, by "staged" I meant that the plane crashes were intentionally caused by those in power in this country, and had nothing to do with Al Quaeda. There is no question of whether the crashes actually happened or not, just the question of WHO masterminded them.

And so Bin Laden just figured, "What the hell, I might as well be video taped confessing to the entire plot, because I wish I had been behind it!"

That is one very strong possibility. It's pretty much what they planned on happening in the Fox miniseries "The Lone Gunmen" from 2000 which dahunan linked in the other thread.

Another possibility to consider is that that is not Osama on those tapes. Ever see the movie "Simone"? That technology actually exists. There is a company that will create convincing computer CGI animations of anyone doing or saying anything, using 15 minutes of real video for the computer to learn that person's real speech patterns. They have samples of bogus speeches given by CGI versions of Bush & Clinton. The actual intended market of the technology is not bogus political speeches however, it's marketed to Hollywood with a really high price tag for them to use if an actor dies while shooting a film. They can have a "vactor" fill in for him in whatever scenes weren't shot yet when he died.

I might have to dig up the link...

Ooo! The Fox Mini-Series! Well, that explains much.

I've seen S1mone, and Forrest Gump, and several other big-budget Hollywood films where the best digital effects artists on the globe try to manipulate the speech of others using cutting edge digital techniques. Only those with low double-digit IQ are fooled and cannot immediately tell the difference.

Certainly not a single recognized published authority on authenticity of video and photographic evidence agrees with you, but I'm sure you won't let that kind of thing stand in the way of your thinking.

Here's the problem with that: not many Americans speak Arabic or know what Osama really sounds like so I highly doubt any of us would be able to "spot the fake". Not only that but the Government has a virtually unlimited budget. Do you honestly believe that the boys over at the NSA and the CIA are incapable of doing this? Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Here's an old document (07/06/90) that describes some of the procedures to be followed. Let me see if I can find a better one.
BAM try that on for size.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3


Funny you should tell me to get out of the country (real thought-provoking argument there, btw)

I am getting the hell out of this G-d-forsaken country "Babylon, the Great". I'm leaving ASAP! If anyone wants to contribute to a fund to get me out quicker go right ahead and start a "get Flyermax the fsck out of our country" fund then

I'm surprised no one has taken me up on this yet! :Q I figured there would be countless ATOTers just itchin to get me the hell out of this country. Guess you all love me so much you couldn't bare to see me go. Maybe I should stay.... :evil:

 

[tcsenter]

Here's the problem with that: not many Americans speak Arabic or know what Osama really sounds like so I highly doubt any of us would be able to "spot the fake".

The video has been reviewed over and over by linguists and Arabic scholars. It seems as though the only people that suggest what you're suggesting are Fox viewers who believe "Alien Autopsy" was like, real man, and the Fox Special about the Faked Moon Landing, that was real man! Don't say it wasn't!

Not only that but the Government has a virtually unlimited budget. Do you honestly believe that the boys over at the NSA and the CIA are incapable of doing this? Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

You have no idea what the NSA even does, do you? The NSA employs no digital video effects artists. The NSA employs a lot of mathematicians, cryptographers, physicists, linguists, foreign language specialists, computer specialists, electronic engineers, among many other disciplines, but no digital video effects artists. The NSA records, compiles, analyzes and interprets massive amounts of data, it doesn't make movies.

The CIA has digital video and CGI artists who possess technology and skills which are vastly superior to that available to, or even known by, the best (and extremely well-paid) Hollywood special effects experts?

Yes, ignorance certainly is bliss....

You'd think someone besides "Alien Autopsy" fans would have come-out in support of your views by now.

 

[NeoV]

umm.....wow...hey flyer, you may not want to pray at the altar of "Emperor's Clothes".com....so you, and that site, really only have a problem with the flight that hit the Pentagon, correct?

I really question how much of the drivel on that "BAM" link of yours is accurate, but are you so sure that our air traffic network was ready for a 9-11 scenario? Weren't they also in the process of grounding every single commercial flight in the skies over America at the time as well?

Consider this as well - if the only real problem is with the plane that hit the pentagon, what would there be to gain by allowing that plane to hit something? I'm quite certain that even if that flight and the flight that crashed in PA never were hijacked things would be no different today - so why 'allow' it to hit the pentagon?

This whole thing stinks, you have serious issues....and I'll say again, the Payne Stewart flight is a perfect example of the response to a 'lost contact' plane AFTER 9-11, not before - if you don't see the difference then your head is stuck up your 4ss..

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Here's the problem with that: not many Americans speak Arabic or know what Osama really sounds like so I highly doubt any of us would be able to "spot the fake".

The video has been reviewed over and over by linguists and Arabic scholars. It seems as though the only people that suggest what you're suggesting are Fox viewers who believe "Alien Autopsy" was like, real man, and the Fox Special about the Faked Moon Landing, that was real man! Don't say it wasn't!

Not only that but the Government has a virtually unlimited budget. Do you honestly believe that the boys over at the NSA and the CIA are incapable of doing this? Ignorance is bliss, I guess.

You have no idea what the NSA even does, do you? The NSA employs no digital video effects artists. The NSA employs a lot of mathematicians, cryptographers, physicists, linguists, foreign language specialists, computer specialists, electronic engineers, among many other disciplines, but no digital video effects artists. The NSA records, compiles, analyzes and interprets massive amounts of data, it doesn't make movies.

The CIA has digital video and CGI artists who possess technology and skills which are vastly superior to that available to, or even known by, the best (and extremely well-paid) Hollywood special effects experts?

Yes, ignorance certainly is bliss....

You'd think someone besides "Alien Autopsy" fans would have come-out in support of your views by now.

::sigh:: it's a never-ending battle. You are more naive than your initial posts in this thread would indicate. To think that the NSA, which is known for having THE MOST POWERFUL COMPUTERS ON EARTH would be incapable of such a feat is quite simply ignorant. Regarding your "arab scholars etc" - what's your point? You just mention them but I fail to see how that is relevant to the topic at hand... If the video wasn't faked then they would've gotten the same results they did. If it was faked they still would have gotten the same results. Do you think that if they went to all the effort to fake the video(s) they wouldn't make any effort to make them authentic? Get real.

 

[tcsenter]

Here's an old document (07/06/90) that describes some of the procedures to be followed. Let me see if I can find a better one. BAM try that on for size.

There are no words to describe how tickled I am to see that you have cited NORAD policy dated 1990.

Now, if you will be so kind, please describe what changes occurred in the NORAD intercepter force and readiness structure during the 1990s. I'm sure your knowledge concerning NORAD and FAA is so vast that you will need me to narrow down what changes I'm referring to.

In particular, how many dedicated interceptor bases, interceptor detachments, interceptor aircraft, interceptor crews, and primary NORAD radar installations there were in 1990, and how those respective numbers changed between 1990 and 2001.

Thank you.

 

[erikistired]

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Skoorb
This is a copy of a poll over at P&N. I saw some disturbing responses there and wanted to see if there is a marked difference between the frequenters of OT and P&N.

hehe, you already know my opinion on this one (it's yes, btw)

So you think this whole fiasco is staged? Explain how.

Because I believe Bush is the Antichrist and was looking for an excuse to start WWIII and 9/11 was just that excuse. As a pilot, I can tell you that the events of 9/11 as explained by the U.S. Government are not plausible.

because he's a troll. period. read anything he's posted. i'd also be willing to bet he's not really a pilot (outside of maybe microsoft flight sim).

 

[tcsenter]

::sigh:: it's a never-ending battle. You are more naive than your initial posts in this thread would indicate. To think that the NSA, which is known for having THE MOST POWERFUL COMPUTERS ON EARTH would be incapable of such a feat is quite simply ignorant. Regarding your "arab scholars etc" - what's your point?

My point? Ok, let me cut to the chase:

Please provide a single person, just one, besides Fox viewers and "Alien Autopsy" believers, who has any kind of respectable credentials other than "I know this one guy..." or "I saw it on a Fox Mini-Series...", someone with demonstrated expertise in these matters, who will support your theory that the technology exists to "fake" the Bin Laden tape. Bueller? Bueller?

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: fisher

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: TommyVercetti

Originally posted by: Flyermax2k3

Originally posted by: Skoorb
This is a copy of a poll over at P&N. I saw some disturbing responses there and wanted to see if there is a marked difference between the frequenters of OT and P&N.

hehe, you already know my opinion on this one (it's yes, btw)

So you think this whole fiasco is staged? Explain how.

Because I believe Bush is the Antichrist and was looking for an excuse to start WWIII and 9/11 was just that excuse. As a pilot, I can tell you that the events of 9/11 as explained by the U.S. Government are not plausible.

because he's a troll. period. read anything he's posted. i'd also be willing to bet he's not really a pilot (outside of maybe microsoft flight sim).

LMAO! Believe whatever you want to about me. I'm not here to win any popularity contests. If I cared a whit what you thought about me I would show you my pilot's license, current FAA medical, and proof of enrollment in the aviation school I'm currently attending, but since I don't give a flying fsck (pun intended) I won't. Speaking of trolls.... coughFLAMEBAITcough.

 

[erikistired]

flyermax2k3, you are a troll, period. everything you post is trolling, every topic you step into you start trouble with someone. you take positions that have no logic, and after you are proven to be wrong over and over you spout lies, try to change the topic or focus, or simply accuse the person of insulting you. go away troll, find some other forum to annoy.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

::sigh:: it's a never-ending battle. You are more naive than your initial posts in this thread would indicate. To think that the NSA, which is known for having THE MOST POWERFUL COMPUTERS ON EARTH would be incapable of such a feat is quite simply ignorant. Regarding your "arab scholars etc" - what's your point?

My point? Ok, let me cut to the chase:

Please provide a single person, just one, besides Fox viewers and "Alien Autopsy" believers, who has any kind of respectable credentials other than "I know this one guy..." or "I saw it on a Fox Mini-Series...", someone with demonstrated expertise in these matters, who will support your theory that the technology exists to "fake" the Bin Laden tape. Bueller? Bueller?

What in the world does that have to do with anything? You sure seem to have some weird obsession with Fox and Alien Autopsy, btw. I doubt anything I say would possibly convince you that I'm right. Just out of curiousity: did you even check out the other link I provided? It's much more relevant than the first. And in response to your previous post about NORAD and the like, yes, I'm well aware of how "homeland air defense" was scaled back in the 90's but your naivete shows itself once again. Can you honestly say that you believe there's not a single aircraft on the entire eastern seaboard ready at all times to protect this nation against events such as 9/11? Now *that's* ignorance.
Did you check into the Payne Stewart incident? I doubt it. Give it a shot, you'll see that there was plenty of time to scramble fighters to intercept those airliners. Hell, they got to Payne Stewart's learjet @ 40,000+ feet from a farther distance than the closest fighters were to the airlines on 9/11. Explain that one for me.

 

[Flyermax2k3]

Originally posted by: fisher
flyermax2k3, you are a troll, period. everything you post is trolling, every topic you step into you start trouble with someone. you take positions that have no logic, and after you are proven to be wrong over and over you spout lies, try to change the topic or focus, or simply accuse the person of insulting you. go away troll, find some other forum to annoy.

Thank you for proving my point. Keep posting flamebait all you like, I'm not taking it.

 

[Yossarian]

Originally posted by: fisher
because he's a troll. period. read anything he's posted. i'd also be willing to bet he's not really a pilot (outside of maybe microsoft flight sim).

I believe he's a pilot, but he has such an elaborate fictional universe constructed that it's pointless to respond to anything he writes (or even read it for that matter).