Conspiracy Theory 9/11 - Part 3

What's your opinion regarding the 9/11 attacks?

  • The official story makes the most sense

    Votes: 48 40.7%

  • The attacks were allowed to happen

    Votes: 28 23.7%

  • Inside job by US/shadow Government

    Votes: 42 35.6%
  • Total voters
    118

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Lebbo73 said:
I was referring to Busted
Click to expand...
Is busted record back?? Weird how he's almost only commented on one thing, 9/11.

I'm curious if he's has another account for posting on Collingwood board, thinking he might ruin his "reputation" by posting on the Conspiracy Thread?
 
Zidane98 said:
It's not even close. The Mt Erebus crash happened when the pilots were misled by their navigation system into flying towards Mt Erebus. They had commenced a pullup manouver after receiving a terrain impact warning. When the impact occurred their rate of descent had reduced significantly and the impact was onto a soft snow covered mountain.

AA77 was crashed into a concrete building with a suicidal pilot pointing its nose down at 800km/h plus. Impact forces between the 2 are simply not comparable at all and to suggest a comparison is simply idiotic.

The reporter on the scene said there was no sign of a plane. Not that there was no plane. That's not surprising considering a jetliner flew into a concrete structure at 800km/h pointed nose down by a suicidal terrorist.

This must have been debunked a million times. The very best security cameras of that era had frame rates of 30fps. With a narrow range of view (the cameras were intended to monitor vehicles arriving at the pentagon) it was impossible for them to capture the entire event on film. In any case the film did actually capture the nose of the plane in the final frame before impact. There's no conspiracy here, 30 fps security cameras simply cannot record an object travelling at 800km/h in its entirety. If you are a reasonable person this should put this line of reasoning to bed for you,

Nonsense. Wreckage was recovered from the aircraft

Aerospaceweb.org | Ask Us - Pentagon & Boeing 757 Wheel Investigation

That's conclusive and there is also plenty of other photos & documentation of wreckage.

The Blackbox was also recovered. The flight path was certainly easy to recreate by anyone intent on crashing the aircraft. The blackbox data has been published.

The section where the plane impacted was in the process of being renovated. It was not fully occupied at the time AA77 impacted it and this is part of the reason casualties inside the Pentagon were minimised.

I can tell you are the sort of person who will probably disregard logical explanations for these things so feel free to digest this information how you feel.
Click to expand...
Good for you that you can tell what sort of person I am. I don't care what you think, I'm not trying to change your mind which would be impossible. However, I've changed mine as I've found out more information from this thread. You should take some time and read all of it. The best bits were videos about "What happened to the planes?"

ANZ 901 didn't have time to pull up in the 6 seconds warning they had and had only just started to veer to the right, before impact. Hard ice just like concrete and yes they thought they were 1300ft over sea ice, instead heading directly into the ground at cruising speed at the base of Mt Erebus.

You still haven't answered my question months ago when I asked which images were real life or drill. There were two drills practiced in the weeks and months before 9/11, one of which involved a plane hitting Pentagon. No aircraft wreckage was seen at the time as reported on CNN and seen on cctv immediately after the explosion. Anything found was placed after. To my knowledge no one has been able to analyse any of the black boxes supposedly found. Why not?

Two planes (or three) planes were reported that morning. One with 4 engines, photographed and reported on TV and radio circling White House at 9.40, when Pentagon exploded and strangely reported by CNN 6 years later to be an E4B, "doomsday" controller plane, but not contained in 9/11 report.
1612881548749.png 1612881593370.png

One was reported coming towards Pentagon 270 degrees from impact. Transportation minister, Mineta, gave evidence to the 9/11 commission that VP Dick Cheney told anti aircraft operators to stand down and not shoot at this aircraft. The aircraft was seen on radar in a circular pattern with another, then disappeared from radar and an explosion occurred soon after on the other side of the Pentagon.

The aircraft that was seen heading towards the Pentagon where the impact occurred had a straight flightpath. Witnesses were tracked down and taken to the location they saw the aircraft and asked to describe what they saw.
1612882966966.png 1612883479030.png
Four gave detailed descriptions of a large white aircraft going overhead with small maroon numbers, not letters on the tail, and a single stripe (some said blue, some red) down the side. No one could see passengers and windows looked black.

A police officer said he saw it lift to get over the bridge, pick up a bit and go over the Pentagon. He said "I know what AA looks like. They have coloured stripes running down the sides ... but I don't know what that was supposed to be.
1612883633198.png 1612883706100.png (simulation)

1612883983659.png AA 77

"Flight 77": The White Plane | 9/11 Pentagon

Features extended versions of our interviews with auto mechanic Edward Paik, gas station employee Robert Turcios, Sgt. William Lagasse, and Sgt. Chadwick Brooks
www.citizeninvestigationteam.com

Everything about what happened to the four commercial aircraft that day doesn't match the story. The only thing that matches at the Pentagon is an explosion. not an aircraft crashing into it.

AA11 was seen on radar and confirmed by scrambled fighter jets asked to stay with it, after it supposedly hit one of the towers. UA 93 was confirmed landed in Cleveland at 10.45 am (supposedly 45 min after it crashed in PA) by multiple witnesses, confirmed by UA and announced by Mayor on TV. UA175 witnessed at Cleveland as well.

1612884823184.png
"Phantom" AA11 at 10.00 am, SW of NYCity. Washington circled.
www.checktheevidence.com

9/11 – Flight 93 – More to the Story

Mark Conlon recently sent me this link to a very detailed article he has written, to try and explain the anomalies with Flight 93 on 9/11 – which the official story alleges crashed in Shanksville, …
www.checktheevidence.com
 
Last edited:
BlueE said:
Good for you that you can tell what sort of person I am. I don't care what you think, I'm not trying to change your mind which would be impossible. However, I've changed mine as I've found out more information from this thread. You should take some time and read all of it. The best bits were videos about "What happened to the planes?"

ANZ 901 didn't have time to pull up in the 6 seconds warning they had and had only just started to veer to the right, before impact. Hard ice just like concrete and yes they thought they were 1300ft over sea ice, instead heading directly into the ground at cruising speed at the base of Mt Erebus.

You still haven't answered my question months ago when I asked which images were real life or drill. There were two drills practiced in the weeks and months before 9/11, one of which involved a plane hitting Pentagon. No aircraft wreckage was seen at the time as reported on CNN and seen on cctv immediately after the explosion. Anything found was placed after. To my knowledge no one has been able to analyse any of the black boxes supposedly found. Why not?

Two planes (or three) planes were reported that morning. One with 4 engines, photographed and reported on TV and radio circling White House at 9.40, when Pentagon exploded and strangely reported by CNN 6 years later to be an E4B, "doomsday" controller plane, but not contained in 9/11 report.
View attachment 1054718View attachment 1054719

One was reported coming towards Pentagon 270 degrees from impact. Transportation minister, Mineta, gave evidence to the 9/11 commission that VP Dick Cheney told anti aircraft operators to stand down and not shoot at this aircraft. The aircraft was seen on radar in a circular pattern with another, then disappeared from radar and an explosion occurred soon after on the other side of the Pentagon.

The aircraft that was seen heading towards the Pentagon where the impact occurred had a straight flightpath. Witnesses were tracked down and taken to the location they saw the aircraft and asked to describe what they saw.
View attachment 1054723View attachment 1054725
Four gave detailed descriptions of a large white aircraft going overhead with small maroon numbers, not letters on the tail, and a single stripe (some said blue, some red) down the side. No one could see passengers and windows looked black.

A police officer said he saw it lift to get over the bridge, pick up a bit and go over the Pentagon. He said "I know what AA looks like. They have coloured stripes running down the sides ... but I don't know what that was supposed to be.
View attachment 1054726View attachment 1054727(simulation)

View attachment 1054728AA 77

"Flight 77": The White Plane | 9/11 Pentagon

Features extended versions of our interviews with auto mechanic Edward Paik, gas station employee Robert Turcios, Sgt. William Lagasse, and Sgt. Chadwick Brooks
www.citizeninvestigationteam.com

Everything about what happened to the four commercial aircraft that day doesn't match the story. The only thing that matches at the Pentagon is an explosion. not an aircraft crashing into it.

AA11 was seen on radar and confirmed by scrambled fighter jets asked to stay with it, after it supposedly hit one of the towers. UA 93 was confirmed landed in Cleveland at 10.45 am (supposedly 45 min after it crashed in PA) by multiple witnesses, confirmed by UA and announced by Mayor on TV. UA175 witnessed at Cleveland as well.

View attachment 1054731
"Phantom" AA11 at 10.00 am, SW of NYCity. Washington circled.
www.checktheevidence.com

9/11 – Flight 93 – More to the Story

Mark Conlon recently sent me this link to a very detailed article he has written, to try and explain the anomalies with Flight 93 on 9/11 – which the official story alleges crashed in Shanksville, …
www.checktheevidence.com
Click to expand...

There's absolutely not a shred of evidence to support any of these claims. Furthermore, there are literally thousands of witnesses to the second WTC tower impact (UA175) with NY on high alert after the first impact by AA11 (which was also witnessed by plenty).

The fact that you are citing absolute blatant nonsense in the face of factual evidence shows you are beyond help on this matter.
 
Lebbo73 said:
Explain to me why he wouldn’t post for three and a half months but only returns when this thread becomes active again? He’s either a shill or he has issues.
Click to expand...

That's quite simple, he received a notification and responded to it. That's how forums work.


I must ask though - why are you not asking the same questions of BlueE who was the one who initially posted recycled conspiracy claims that have long since been put to bed?
 
Zidane98 said:
That's quite simple, he received a notification and responded to it. That's how forums work.


I must ask though - why are you not asking the same questions of BlueE who was the one who initially posted recycled conspiracy claims that have long since been put to bed?
Click to expand...
I shouldn’t have to explain the difference in posting habits of every single poster in this thread compared to Busted.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lebbo73 said:
I shouldn’t have to explain the difference in posting habits of every single poster in this thread compared to Busted.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone anywhere posts like that, unless they only pop into a duplicate a/c at times, which is against the rules unless you're a mod isn't it? If so, and because he posts in opposites. I'm guessing Carlton.

He's so desperate to defend the official narrative for 9/11, like it's personal or something?
 
Zidane98 said:
That's quite simple, he received a notification and responded to it. That's how forums work.
I must ask though - why are you not asking the same questions of BlueE who was the one who initially posted recycled conspiracy claims that have long since been put to bed?
Click to expand...
If you note, I only started posting on 9/11 and controlled demolition to link and discuss the new four year university research that concluded Building 7 was defiantly not brought down by fires and controlled demolition was the only explanation to fit the evidence.

Anyhow, first hand eyewitness accounts and affidavits, flight logs, radar, military operations information from Court or FOI, have caused me to rethink and debunk the official version.

Who would you trust? Real time recordings flight traffic controllers, radar and the only jets scrambled that day that made any contact with a "high jacked aircraft" or VP Chaney or his direct command, telling you that this aircraft crashed into the towers hour before?

All anyone witnessed hitting both towers, were 767s identical to the fleet of remotely operated USAF 767s.

Silly question, I know you only believe what you're told to, and can't even consider that you might have been lied to, as has happened many other times in history.
 
BustedWing said:
Oh I don’t know.....

Multiple comments about me, and not 9/11 - the topic at hand.

Not sure if that’s narcissistic, more-so a reflection of what people seem to be thinking about ;)
Click to expand...


Here's a sample of your posts that don't seem very 'on topic'. I'm sure there's plenty more.


BustedWing said:
Remember those days when you pretended not to be a troll in this forum Yebiga?

I do.

They were fun...
Click to expand...


BustedWing said:
Nice to see you again Yebiga, welcome back to the thread.

I seem to recall the last time you were here it didn't go too well for you. Done any more research since you were last here?

I hope so...
Click to expand...


BustedWing said:
FW.....

Fantastic Worker?

Furious Wingman?

Fornicating Warrior?

Ferocious Writer?

I'm Lost nut. What did you mean??
Click to expand...



BustedWing said:
Some people like long walks on the beach.

Others like to read romance novels

I like to argue with trolls and morons on the internet it seems.... :(
Click to expand...


:$

Are you going to start that BustedWing Biography/FAQ thread soon?
 
Last edited:
Crankitup said:
Here's a sample of your posts that don't seem very 'on topic'. I'm sure there's plenty more.















:$

Are you going to start that BustedWing Biography/FAQ thread soon?
Click to expand...

You wouldn’t be cherry picking would you there, Crankitup??

No interest in showing the posts I was responding to? Not relevant at all you don’t think?

No concept of context entering your head when you decided to scroll through my posts?




Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Crankitup said:
Are you going to start that BustedWing Biography/FAQ thread soon?
Click to expand...

Based on your commitment to trawling through posts I made, what.....YEARS AGO....you’d be a subscriber it would seem.


You are aware of the irony of calling me narcissistic and saying people don’t really pay me too much attention/it’s in my head.....while scrolling through YEARS OF MY POSTS....are you?

It’s legit comical.

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Last edited:
BustedWing said:
No interest in showing the posts I was responding to? Not relevant at all you don’t think?
Click to expand...

Actually in most cases the full context actually paints you in a worse light.

For example #603 links to the full context of the first one.

Yebiga posted a link to an article critical of the NIST report and you responded with the following deflection.

BustedWing said:
Remember those days when you pretended not to be a troll in this forum Yebiga?

I do.

They were fun...
Click to expand...

:$
 
BustedWing said:
Based on your commitment to trawling through posts I made, what.....YEARS AGO....you’d be a subscriber it would seem.
Click to expand...

Two minutes using the search function looking for posts where you mentioned various (I chose 4) other participants and then quickly scanning them from oldest to newest. I stopped when I had enough to demonstrate your hypocrisy. If you want some more recent ones I'll happily oblige.

BustedWing said:
You are aware of the irony of calling me narcissistic ...
Click to expand...


Sorry if I confused you but I didn't do that at all. I was responding to your suggestion about starting a thread that would be focused on your good self. If you started such a thread or convinced others to do so, I think that would be a prime example of narcissism don't you?

BustedWing said:
... and saying people don’t really pay me too much attention/it’s in my head.....
Click to expand...

Once again, you are confused. I never did that.
 
Back to the topic people. We don't need this thread to degenerate with petty personal squabbles :rolleyes:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Conspiracy Theory 9/11 - Part 3

Back
Top