you know what's astonishing?

[Cj Tari]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

it would be very interesting to see some of your sources for some of the info you post in here, because i think your posting a lot of this info from all of this conspiracy theory sites as if its "official" information.

here is a site that lists some info on Barbara Olson's phone calls, it even lists the time of the calls and some Airfone information on them:

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Barbara_Olson_calls

again like Miro said, if youre basing your whole theory on one cab driver, then i would assume very little people would take you seriously.

[runningman]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

you see CJ the gov't says the call happened and then says it didn't happen so you can't tell what the truth is..

[yesme]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

it would be very interesting to see some of your sources for some of the info you post in here, because i think your posting a lot of this info from all of this conspiracy theory sites as if its "official" information.

which info would you liked sourced?

United States v. Zacarias Moussaoui
Criminal No. 01-455-A


Prosecution Trial Exhibits

Exhibit Number Description P200054 Summary of Flight 77 depicting: the identity of pilots and flight attendants, seat assignments of passengers, and telephone calls from the flight[Listener discretion is advised. This exhibit also includes information about the other three flights hijacked on September 11]


Download this exhibit. It is a Flash presentation contained in a ZIP file.
This is a 27 MB set of files and may take several minutes to download

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notable...s/P200054.html

here is a site that lists some info on Barbara Olson's phone calls, it even lists the time of the calls and some Airfone information on them:
http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Barbara_Olson_calls

interesting that on all the papers, each call under duration is listed as 0. and what phone did she use? cell phone or airfone? if airfone then simply provide the credit card statement, if cell phone, then provide that bill.

but as pointed out, the government in a trial has dismissed her calls.

again like Miro said, if youre basing your whole theory on one cab driver, then i would assume very little people would take you seriously.

i'm basing it on more then one cab driver, but how many little things/lies before it becomes clear something is wrong here?

[yesme]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

oh dude, you gotta dl that flash presentation, its the shit.

ok, from the presentation the government did at this trial, barbera olsen placed one call, that did not connect, for a total of 0 seconds.

who exactly would know better then the government eh?

so ted olsen lied, correct?

[yesme]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

busted their arguement, now its like a ghost town...lol

[Cj Tari]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

of course you did........nothing to do with your inability to comprehend and understand other peoples points of view........

[Miroslav]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

btw, there ARE studies done on dna in a fire setting, i would suggest you read up on it, along with temps used in the creamation process.

i'll give you a clue though, dna burns in alot less of a fire then a 757 engine does.

http://www.ees.ufl.edu/homepp/cywu/ENV4121/Project2001/Crematory/Regulations.htm

New crematoriums, constructed on or after August 30, 1989, must have at least a 1.0 second interval at which the temperature reaches 1800oF. And, the operating temperature must never go below 1600° F. Old crematoriums, constructed before August 30,1989, must reach a temperature of 1600° F for at least 1.0 second during the process. And, must maintain a temperature of 1400° F or greater throughout the cremation. These temperatures ensure complete combustion and volatization of all body fluids.

http://www.mountpleasantgroupofcemeteries.ca/products_services/cremation.asp

In a cremation, the casket or container is placed in a chamber, where the temperature is raised to approximately 1,000° C. After approximately 90 minutes, all organic matter is consumed by heat or evaporation. The residue (known as "cremated remains") is made up of bone fragments, which are processed into fine particles and placed in a temporary container provided by the crematorium or an urn purchased by the family. The entire process takes approximately three hours.

Those are fairly high temperatures. But anyways, the point is that it actually isn't quite as easy as one might think to completely destroy all traces of DNA. They instituted new tests that were able to exploit smaller fragments of DNA where the traditional tests relying on longer DNA strands would not work. Here's John Butler, the head of forensics/human identity testing project team at the NIST talking about it:

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/newsfromnist_DNAinterview.htm

But I'm sure you're an expert on DNA technology who has already "proven" that the tests were fabricated as part of the conspiracy.
to make 9-11 work? no

but it is a small part of the bigger story, yes, the cab driver story is supposed to make the plane flying thru 5 lightpoles more believeable, except to people like me who know how plane wings are built and what they can withstand.

yeah, except that thinking people would recognize that the notion of the government dotting the I's and crossing the T's on their 9-11 conspiracy operation, and then forgetting basic things like the telephone poles and requiring some cab driver's involvement to help prop up their story is R I D I C U L O U S.

i wont bore you with the details on how wings can flex up and down but not front to back due to the spars in the wing.

i wont bore you with the fact that BIRDS have been known to damage wings(but steel lightpoles dont..lmfao)

Good. And I won't bore you with the fact that no one is actually claiming that the wings sustained no damage at all in the final moments of flight. Or that the exact damage of the lamp poles is hard to determine, as it would also depend on the amount of resistance they provide upon impact at their weakest point. Maybe somebody is claiming that the wings are flexing back and forth, but I'm sure not.

there is no other possibilty.

Or the wings, laden with fuel, promptly exploded upon the major impact into the building.

i dont see no holes in the wall where the wings went into the building, nor do i see the wings outside of the wall.

Maybe that's because your research didn't turn up the fact that the Pentagon is structurally very different from and much "tougher" than the WTC buildings where the planes could much more easily penetrate the outer walls of the building and leave wing holes.

btw, before you ask, i have 3 years of aerospace education thru the civil air patrol, i know how planes are built, and how they perform, i can provide tons of links that will back up everything stated about a planes wings in my post.

That's nice.

you mean, do i think the government or who ever did this planted witnesses and people like floyd to make the story more believeable?

absolutly.

Oh, before you ask, I have many years of common sense education, and I know when I see a thoroughly unsubstantiated statement that grasps at straws - and this is one (the whole Rumsfeld thing and "planes costing too much" is another).

This notion of the government needing to enlist a cab driver to somehow give credibility to their plot (as if they needed him at ALL??) is completely ridiculous - even if I accept the premise that the government pulled off the whole thing.

Really? I've seen cheap B-list Hollywood action movies with a more realistic plot.

yeah, the mind is an easy thing to manipulate in case you did not know.

Yeah, you don't say, mr. "stolen $2.3 trillion".

this was 4 days before 9-11, funny the lawn points out the exact flight path of the jet before it happened.

Yeah, because the government operatives who were planning the 9-11 conspiracy operation were so stupid that they decided to leave everyone all of these valuable clues of what they were going to do in 4 days, right.

Here's what I just don't get about you... You do all this research and pass yourself off as an expert on everything - and you do make some good points... and then you lose it all on conclusions that reach way too far, like "the government had to hide that they stole $2.3 trillion" or "they needed a single no-name cab driver to make their plot work".

No matter how much research you do, those conclusions still don't make sense. And the funny thing is that they still don't make sense even if I accept the premise that the government did it all.

[Miroslav]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

..and continuing on...

i would be surprised if you got 20 people who saw the palne enter the building. at 500 mph, you would have to be looking right at the pentagon when it hit(as you can see by the video from the pentagon)as the plane was a blur.

What can I say? Maybe you should do more research, because there were a whole lot more than 20 witnesses - and they were independent, unrelated, and geographically diverse. I'm not saying that all of them say the plane all the way to the end as it hit the building, but lots of people saw the plane come in.

And I don't need research to know that your claim about not being able to see the plane at 500 mph is completely misleading. It depends on your length of visual perspective of the plane's incoming trajectory, right? Come on, Mr. Research...

If you happened to be focused on the last 20 feet or so, like that camera was, then no, you're not going to see shit.

If you happen to see a much greater distance of the flight as the plane is coming in, then you'll have time to notice that it's a plane, even at 500 mph (even if you won't have time to document every single detail about it).

and again, eyewitness are shaky at best, and even less so when they are paid by the government, i know planting eyewitnesses to influnce what people saw is not something you have studied, by it's a classic propaganda ploy.

Oh give me a break, now you're a studied expert on "classic propaganda ploys", too? Congratulations, your ego really does know no bounds.

Man, I thought I had this all researched... damn! Why didn't I think of those "classic propaganda ploys" in the eyewitness evidence (even though there is no credible evidence for any)?

If you're so willing to label everything from the conventional story as "classic propaganda ploys", then how come you're never willing to consider that same label for anything on the conspiracy story side? Everything is always so reliable on that side. Hmmm. Interesting how that works.

your researched stopped and started with that link i'm willing to bet. other wise you would of known that THE GOVERNMENT now claims the calls from barbera olsen did not take place(which either means her husband lied or another part of the government cover up)

Yes, this is your best point yet (you also had a good point about the WTC fire), although it is still far from sufficient to debunk the argument that a plane did hit the Pentagon that day.

I don't know why Ted changed his stories, and I don't know what exactly happened with her call.

I will say that the government didn't say that the calls didn't take place; they simply said that they cannot conclusively determine the identities of the caller and the receiver. They do, however, say that there are records of 4 calls from the plane that they can only best describe as "unknown". But this is not the same as having disproven that she placed the calls...

..besides, if it's the government that we're accusing of planting evidence here, don't you think they could have forged evidence that showed that it was her, for the sake of their plot?

So yeah, I can't tell you that I can prove to you that she called him because I can't prove it.

But here is what I do feel confident in stating:
There were many calls that day that family members and spouses received from the airplanes and many of them were actually made from seat-back phones, which did exist in some of the planes at that time (not saying they existed in Flight 77 - I really don't know). And it is also plausible for the cell phone calls to have worked for a brief duration of time if the plane is at a sufficiently low altitude. There is evidence on this, and I could also post up a storm - but I'm sure in all of your thousands of hours of research you've already seen it.

It is far beyond common sense plausibility to believe that the government could have gotten all of those different relatives of the dead to participate in their plot, and I also don't believe that the government could adequately faked all of the voices and mannerisms of peoples' spouses, daughters, sons, etc. to fool people who knew them for a lifetime. There really isn't evidence for that.

So even if the Olson call didn't take place, that doesn't at all suggest to me that none of the calls took place. And I'd still need more than that to overturn all of the eyewitnesses, DNA evidence, and debris evidence from the plane that crashed into the Pentagon.

i know it's hard for you, but i'll make it easy for you.

i'll accept that the parts are from a 757 engine, ok.

now YOU tell me where the other 99% of the plane and the 1+(+ =meaning the parts of the enigne that they did not find)engine, where is that at?
it's a simple question you keep skipping over, i thought you were going to anwser all my points? have i skipped some of yours or something?

I thought I already answered it like a zillion times. When a plane crashes into a heavily reinforced building like the Pentagon and explodes, it tends to burn and fall into little pieces. Depending on the physics of the crash, planes can actually structurally disintegrate quite significantly. They don't necessarily tend to stay in one piece, you know?

Here is just one recent example - maybe you heard of this tragic plane crash in Iran that crashed out in the open (not even hitting another reinforced structure). Was this a government conspiracy cover-up, too? Be sure to look at the pictures.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/07/15/iran.plane.crash/#cnnSTCPhoto

Here's some more, unrelated.

http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/crashdebris.html

I'm sure you could find more examples if you looked. Maybe you should do some more research.

you are correct, and when they come to shoot me with vaccine or when the dollar collapses, then i know who is to blame, and no one will stop me.

Ok. Me, I'm going to keep on living for now. It's certainly not perfect here, but it's still way the hell better than many other parts of the world as far as individual rights go - places like Iran, China, etc.

Look, this is really not going to go anywhere... we're never going to see eye to eye. Even though you make some good points along the way, and even though there are many things of that day that I can't explain (I'm not an expert on everything), I just can't accept your far-reaching conclusions of "$2.3 trillion stolen", some needless cab driver involvement, and claims of eyewitnesses being faked, etc without some dramatic new evidence.

[yesme]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Those are fairly high temperatures. But anyways, the point is that it actually isn't quite as easy as one might think to completely destroy all traces of DNA. They instituted new tests that were able to exploit smaller fragments of DNA where the traditional tests relying on longer DNA strands would not work. Here's John Butler, the head of forensics/human identity testing project team at the NIST talking about it:

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/n...Ainterview.htm

But I'm sure you're an expert on DNA technology who has already "proven" that the tests were fabricated as part of the conspiracy.
to make 9-11 work? no

those ARE high temps. lets remember those for later shall we?

yeah, except that thinking people would recognize that the notion of the government dotting the I's and crossing the T's on their 9-11 conspiracy operation, and then forgetting basic things like the telephone poles and requiring some cab driver's involvement to help prop up their story is R I D I C U L O U S.

the poles and cab driver are hardly the 9-11 story, but just a small part, and with outright lies in these aspects, a further investigation should be done.

Good. And I won't bore you with the fact that no one is actually claiming that the wings sustained no damage at all in the final moments of flight. Or that the exact damage of the lamp poles is hard to determine, as it would also depend on the amount of resistance they provide upon impact at their weakest point. Maybe somebody is claiming that the wings are flexing back and forth, but I'm sure not.

it's not getting thru.

a HAIRLINE fracture, going 500 mph(the wind) would of ripped the wings off, after going thru those poles, the walls would of knocked the wings right off.

Or the wings, laden with fuel, promptly exploded upon the major impact into the building.

sigh

757's wings are not fuel laden, there is no fuel in the wings, only in the wing root, which is right next to the plane, if they would of exploded, the wing ends would of went flying.

besides, the only way you can account for column take out at the pentagon is if the wings go in.

Maybe that's because your research didn't turn up the fact that the Pentagon is structurally very different from and much "tougher" than the WTC buildings where the planes could much more easily penetrate the outer walls of the building and leave wing holes.

see above, also note that steel columns on outside of wtc towers ARE harder then concrete and glass(you know, the windows in the wings way that were not broken)

Oh, before you ask, I have many years of common sense education, and I know when I see a thoroughly unsubstantiated statement that grasps at straws - and this is one (the whole Rumsfeld thing and "planes costing too much" is another).

This notion of the government needing to enlist a cab driver to somehow give credibility to their plot (as if they needed him at ALL??) is completely ridiculous - even if I accept the premise that the government pulled off the whole thing.

Really? I've seen cheap B-list Hollywood action movies with a more realistic plot.

but, what matters i that the people bought it right? i mean hell i bought it at first as well.

i find it funny, that my plot sucks, but yet terrorist masterminds who check onto a plane to hi jack it under one name, but yet also carry their real passports on their person.

and the sky over our capitol unprotected for 45 mins to an hour after we knew we are under attack?

huh?

are you kidding me?

yeah, that sounds much more logical.

Yeah, you don't say, mr. "stolen $2.3 trillion".

i'm glad your loved ones paying taxes out their ass cause the dod "lost"(is that better?) 2.3 trillion is something that you find joy in.

Yeah, because the government operatives who were planning the 9-11 conspiracy operation were so stupid that they decided to leave everyone all of these valuable clues of what they were going to do in 4 days, right.

no they found those after.

FBI reported that they traced the attackers to Florida where the FBI was told by the bar owner/manager that the two suspects came into the bar couple days ago and drank LIQUOR heavily (GOOD TRUE MUSLIMS AND DRINKING, WELL YES I KNOW SOME (M) DO DRINK ALCOHOL BUT TRUE (JIHADI) MUSLIMS?...No!). My Q? Drinking and fighting with the bar manager over the bill, possibility to get the police involved, be in position to get caught, blow up and jeopardize their well thought out and long awaited plan. I DON'T THINK SO.

FBI received a tip from a passenger who boarded a different plane and reached his destination safely that he had a confrontation with two Middle Eastern gentlemen at the Logan airport in Boston, MA. He gave them the exact location of their stranded car parked in the lot, where FBI found the MANUAL ON HOW TO FLY A PLANE in ARABIC language. Also, they found the information leading to the rental car and credit card information with which the 2 plane tickets were purchased from Boston to L.A.
My Q? People capable of plotting and executing such a sophisticated plan would leave the ARABIC language manual and other information in the rental car to be found later by the FBI. HOW DUMB is that BY PROFESSIONAL TERRORISTS.

In the Pink Pony strip club in Daytona Beach, Florida the night before the 9/11 attacks, three men make anti-American sentiments and talk of impending bloodshed. One says, “Wait ‘til tomorrow. America is going to see bloodshed.” These are not any of the hijackers, since they had all left Florida by this time, but it is suspected these men knew the hijackers. [Associated Press, 9/14/2001; MSNBC, 9/23/2001]

..and continuing on...

i will finish later.

[chunky]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Those are fairly high temperatures. But anyways, the point is that it actually isn't quite as easy as one might think to completely destroy all traces of DNA. They instituted new tests that were able to exploit smaller fragments of DNA where the traditional tests relying on longer DNA strands would not work. Here's John Butler, the head of forensics/human identity testing project team at the NIST talking about it:

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/n...Ainterview.htm

But I'm sure you're an expert on DNA technology who has already "proven" that the tests were fabricated as part of the conspiracy.

I mite be wrong here but how was the DNA collected at ground zero? Usually when a plane crashes the wreckage is taken to a warehouse and analysed to see what exactly happened. I'm guessing this is when DNA is collected and analyzed. My understanding was that everything was loaded into trucks and sent off for salvage. If it was collected on site it must of been one hell of a job, surely they would have to analyze every single piece of dust and wreckage.

[floridaorange]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

What's the point of debating DNA tests? What do those test have to do with any of this?

[runningman]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

a lot.. the point is that everything about 9/11 stinks to the high heaven. A new investigation is desperetly needed to quench the american peoples thirst for the truth that has lead their country in the shit hole.

Patriot Act
Iraq War
Afghan War
Future Iranian war

Also don't you guys realize that the supposed hijackers were Saudi? Why don't we go in there and clean house. I can assure you that nobody hates the west more then the Sauds and the Muslim Brotherhood.

[chunky]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

I was just curious as to how they collected it. I'm not saying they didn't do it. But it must of been an enormous job.

[Miroslav]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

it's not getting thru.

a HAIRLINE fracture, going 500 mph(the wind) would of ripped the wings off, after going thru those poles, the walls would of knocked the wings right off.

Have you ever considered the fact that maybe you're not quite the aviation and physics "expert" that your research apparently leads you to think you are?

You make this claim with such certainty of hairline fracture exactly here and there, wings would have definitely been knocked off, definitely wouldn't have exploded..."it MUST have happened JUST that way". What's your basis for being able to make those claims with such certainty? Do you really have the data to be able to determine the exact probability of when and how the wings would react in the final moments before impact as they struck a variety of objects, not just the light poles (also a generator, also possibly one of the wingtips struck the ground...)?

Or are you claiming this on the same data-driven basis that you used to claim that the eyewitnesses were paid off in a "classic propaganda ploy"?

I'm sorry, but I am not buying your "expertise" in this regard. I would accept the argument from a large panel of well-qualified, experienced physics PhDs and other experts who really know their stuff, and I haven't seen that. Why aren't all of the airline pilots of the world, the physics professors of the world, and the structural engineers of the world all saying "this is impossible"? Were they all paid off as part of the plot? As far as I can tell, hardly any of them are, and only a few guys like Steven E. Jones are (and most of the other experts disagree with him).

And I still don't think that any of this is sufficient to deny the argument that a plane did crash into the Pentagon - because that argument is based on a hell of a lot more than your conjectures about how the plane should have reacted to light poles in its path in the final few seconds prior to impact.

sigh.

sigh.

757's wings are not fuel laden, there is no fuel in the wings, only in the wing root, which is right next to the plane, if they would of exploded, the wing ends would of went flying.

Get me a real panel of experts who all say that, and I will accept it. All I would tell you is that you should take a better look at some of those other photographs of air crashes out in the open that I posted before and tell me where you see the wings?

but, what matters i that the people bought it right? i mean hell i bought it at first as well.

i find it funny, that my plot sucks, but yet terrorist masterminds who check onto a plane to hi jack it under one name, but yet also carry their real passports on their person.

and the sky over our capitol unprotected for 45 mins to an hour after we knew we are under attack?

huh?

are you kidding me?

yeah, that sounds much more logical.

Hey, sounds more realistic to me than your story, which apparently is:

Rumsfeld, in a moment of rare honesty, decides for some reason to publicly tell people in a speech that he is currently stealing 1/5th of the national GDP.

The government decides to first mastermind airplane crashes into the WTC buildings and then detonate them (and who knows what they did with the Pentagon)...to do who knows what? We had already been in Iraq once before without knocking down a bunch of buildings...was it really necessary to go through this whole complicated operation just to find reasons to do that again?

We didn't even go into Iraq until well later, and that was thanks to a bunch of fake-ass data that the government showed on how Saddam had nuclear weapons, WMDs, blah blah... See, THAT makes sense to me. That is much easier and more effective than this whole ridiculous plot., we probably could have found easier reasons to go in again.

And I know you've claimed that they hit the Pentagon to hide evidence of their money laundering, but come on...in this day and age of electronic records, you really think that there isn't an easier way to fake the records? It just all seems needlessly complex and unrealistic for a plot.

Then, literally hundreds of independent eyewitnesses all around the area see a plane fly into the Pentagon, but you claim that this is not possible and no plane was ever there?

Finally, you think that the government, with all of its resources and expert capabilities, messed up the manner in which the light poles fell in their plan...and then somehow recruited some poor taxicab driver to be there just at the right time at the time of the explosion so as to give their story some sort of special credibility that you think it needed?

Man... I just think this story has a long way to go. Much farther than a group of terrorists hijacking planes and running them into things - and there is historical precedent for terrorists hijacking planes and for blowing shit up...so it's not that much of a stretch for me to accept this.

i'm glad your loved ones paying taxes out their ass cause the dod "lost"(is that better?) 2.3 trillion is something that you find joy in.

We are paying taxes out the ass, but it's for different reasons.

i will finish later.

Look...I completely support your right to believe whatever you want, but I'm just not buying it without some seriously new evidence. If that happens, then I will come back here and publicly admit that I was wrong. But...for now, we're gonna have to agree to disagree, ok?

[chunky]

Re: you know what's astonishing?

Have you ever considered the fact that maybe you're not quite the aviation "expert" that your apparently extensive research leads you to think you are?

You make this claim with such certainty of hairline fracture exactly here and there, wings would have definitely been knocked off, definitely wouldn't have exploded..."it MUST have happened JUST that way". Well, obviously it didn't, and obviously you have no way of being able to make these claims with such certainty. You don't have the data to be able to determine the exact probability of when and how the wings would react in the final moments before impact as they struck a variety of objects, not just the light poles (also a generator, also possibly one of the wingtips struck the ground...)

You would of thought there would of been some sort of indication that the wings of the plane collided with something before the impact. Air France where able to tell the recent missing Air France plane that went into the ocean a few months back had a sudden loss of power before it crashed without even finding the black box. Its also been mentioned before that telemetry from the black box on the pentagon doesn't match the official story and no eyewitnesses are willing to go on record that the plane followed the official story flight path.