Debate 911 was 17 years ago

[Cirrus]

They died....drone driven doesn't mean no passengers.

Um, sure. I haven't yet seen something that isn't at least suspect on the "9/11 was an inside job" conspiracy. I lean more towards Occum's Razor on this one especially because I knew someone on one of the planes.

 

[MeditationSync]

That's a rough one @Cirrus
I'm sorry for your loss :-(
I try to stay away from theories about what the planes were/are/or are not, mainly because the way the buildings fell provides all the evidence I need to make an informed judgement that it was planned well in advance. Add to that our rights being stripped by the day, war started in the wrong countries, and actively hiding the Saudis involvement from victims families says it all.
The entire thing is really sad to think about but once a year here we are talking about it and younger generations need to know what happened.
We may never know the "full" story but we've got a large enough overall picture to make many logical conclusions.
Much Love and again I'm sorry for your loss.

 

[Cirrus]

That's a rough one @Cirrus
I'm sorry for your loss :-(
I try to stay away from theories about what the planes were/are/or are not, mainly because the way the buildings fell provides all the evidence I need to make an informed judgement that it was planned well in advance. Add to that our rights being stripped by the day, war started in the wrong countries, and actively hiding the Saudis involvement from victims families says it all.
The entire thing is really sad to think about but once a year here we are talking about it and younger generations need to know what happened.
We may never know the "full" story but we've got a large enough overall picture to make many logical conclusions.
Much Love and again I'm sorry for your loss.

Thanks for your kinds words.

I think the part that nobody really talks about is that in 1993 terrorists tried to bring down the towers with a bomb. Maybe the planes alone shouldn't have brought the towers down, but in coordination with bombs inside buildings may have finished what the 1993 bombers horribly tried to do. All of this could have been done as a concerted effort by terrorists who exploited the freedoms and lack of security that the US had at the time. I really don't want to believe it was an inside job by the US against its own people... and maybe I want to be blind because the US is supposed to be "better than this". Maybe there is something out there that will change my mind, but, right now, I think such conspiracy theories are suspect.

 

[titorite]

So what happened to all the occupants of the planes?

What occupants? They never needed occupants. Names on a register list is all they needed. When planning a plot like this one doesnt need to make things anymore complicated than needs be.

 

[titorite]

Thanks for your kinds words.

I think the part that nobody really talks about is that in 1993 terrorists tried to bring down the towers with a bomb. Maybe the planes alone shouldn't have brought the towers down, but in coordination with bombs inside buildings may have finished what the 1993 bombers horribly tried to do. All of this could have been done as a concerted effort by terrorists who exploited the freedoms and lack of security that the US had at the time. I really don't want to believe it was an inside job by the US against its own people... and maybe I want to be blind because the US is supposed to be "better than this". Maybe there is something out there that will change my mind, but, right now, I think such conspiracy theories are suspect.

THe FBI was complicit , they supplied the detonators and the plan. The reason the towers did not fall that day is because Salam refused to park the van next to the central column corridor opting instead to park as far outside as possible, just in case it was a set up...which it turned out to be.


Emad Salem - Wikipedia

 

[titorite]

Also the cell phone calls were impossible in that day and age with that level of tech.... people were still using beepers back then and the smart phone wasn't around yet... not to mention the the altitude and speed

 

[TimeFlipper]

Back in 2001 all cell phones were operating on "Analogue signals", and those signals used higher power than the "Digital signals" which have now been in operation since 2008...The Typical range of the Analogue signal was up to 10 miles, which would equate to 52800 feet, so therefore flying at 36000 feet (6.8 miles), the signal from the ground Cell Net station could have easily reached an aeroplane, and the transmission from the cell phone on board an aeroplane could have reached a Cell Net at ground level..

However, according to Deena Burnett, she received a call from her husband on his cell phone which was recorded on her home phone Caller Identification System, while the hijacked plane was supposedly at a height of 36000 feet...Some people have rejected that claim, and said that the plane was already on a collision course with one of the Twin Towers and had already descended to under 5000 feet during the time of her husbands phone call!!....
The way the FBI treated the investigations with Deena Burnett, made it appear as if she was a liar!...Which is typical of FBI cover-ups..

 

[Cirrus]

What occupants? They never needed occupants. Names on a register list is all they needed. When planning a plot like this one doesnt need to make things anymore complicated than needs be.

So you're saying that there were no people on the planes? That they just had a list of people that were supposed to be on the planes and they killed them all prior to boarding?

 

[Cirrus]

Back in 2001 all cell phones were operating on "Analogue signals", and those signals used higher power than the "Digital signals" which have now been in operation since 2008...The Typical range of the Analogue signal was up to 10 miles, which would equate to 52800 feet, so therefore flying at 36000 feet (6.8 miles), the signal from the ground Cell Net station could have easily reached an aeroplane, and the transmission from the cell phone on board an aeroplane could have reached a Cell Net at ground level..

However, according to Deena Burnett, she received a call from her husband on his cell phone which was recorded on her home phone Caller Identification System, while the hijacked plane was supposedly at a height of 36000 feet...Some people have rejected that claim, and said that the plane was already on a collision course with one of the Twin Towers and had already descended to under 5000 feet during the time of her husbands phone call!!....
The way the FBI treated the investigations with Deena Burnett, made it appear as if she was a liar!...Which is typical of FBI cover-ups..

So I'll agree that the cellphone call issue holds some weight based on, if nothing else, the plane was moving too fast for cellphones to get and maintain a steady signal given the technology at the time. Yet this article from three days after the attack seems to say that phone calls were possible. I have a hard time believing that the FAA or anybody really, hasn't attempted a real cellphone test while onboard a commercial flight. The fact that the FAA just says "no cellphone use" because they might interfere with guidance and other technology onboard comes from some type of scientific test and not just a mere possibility.

Thinking more about this matter and other issues. There always seems to be the official report and then people looking to discredit the official report. What if the truth really is that the official reports are accurate and those looking to discredit it are anarchists looking to tear down all governments by quietly trying to dismantle the truth?

 

[TimeFlipper]

So I'll agree that the cellphone call issue holds some weight based on, if nothing else, the plane was moving too fast for cellphones to get and maintain a steady signal given the technology at the time. Yet this article from three days after the attack seems to say that phone calls were possible. I have a hard time believing that the FAA or anybody really, hasn't attempted a real cellphone test while onboard a commercial flight. The fact that the FAA just says "no cellphone use" because they might interfere with guidance and other technology onboard comes from some type of scientific test and not just a mere possibility.

Thinking more about this matter and other issues. There always seems to be the official report and then people looking to discredit the official report. What if the truth really is that the official reports are accurate and those looking to discredit it are anarchists looking to tear down all governments by quietly trying to dismantle the truth?

You overlooked the fact that there were several cell nets in operation even in 2001 (i had a great small mobile cell phone, fitted with a small retractable antenna that worked for miles, back in 1994!!), i could even use it to listen into what people were saying in my lounge when i was working away.....All i had to do was to set my cell phone to standby, and switch off the volume, so no one could here me calling my cell phone when i was at work, sneeeeeky!! ..

When the aircraft were travelling fast, they would have been picked up at the next nearest cell net station, they actually had more than one cell net station per city, and aircraft could communicate with all of them very easily and clearly, even flying at high speed ..
However, i still believe that there was some sort of conspiracy going on!!..