maybe after the twin towers got hit the government took advantage of the mess and did some skunk works.
I thought they did get training at pilot schools in the country. The stupid part was that they all asked for training on how to fly a plane but not how to take off or land. If I remember correctly (and if it hasn't already been debunked) that was one of the things that should have raised suspicians before the events occured. I think the events happened more or less they way they are depicted. The Roswell conspiracy is more believble, IMO. Occam's Razor
I think the manuvers/ navigation were too good to be done by 1st time pilots that trained on Cessnas -- somewhere they trained on the real deal. It doesn't make any sense that they already knew how to fly, but so much of 9/11 is completely bizarre. I've heard time and time again quotes from the flight trainers that none of them were any good at all. I wonder if attending the training was some sort of ruse in itself?
Come on! You don't really believe this consipiracy stuff? People take a position and then go out and find any kind of "evidence" they can twist to their point -- ignoring any facts that disagree with their position. The leaps of faith and logic that it would have taken to make these consipiracies true is ridiculous.
Please read the book- "Crossing the Rubicon" by Michael Ruppert He has proof what happened to Norad. It only takes 3-4 minutes for Norad to intercept a plane headed for NYC. There was a well planned sophisticated effort in place to ensure the highjackers would not be shot down. The cover-up for 9-11 is at the highest levels so this will never be brought to light. When it starts in the White House, and is complicit with others at the very top the truth will not survive. The truth will be discredited with the same old 'conspiracy idiots' mantra. (same-assisination of JFK)That way the majority of people would rather believe what they are told to believe. 9-11 lauched the Neo-Cons into the middle east. The mission has been accomplished. I don't mind being called a conspiracy nut-case. But I would rather know the truth than worry about my own reputation. Put me on record as one who personally believes there are people in our government who permitted and aided in 9-11. They will never be brought to trial and they will never have my trust again.
8:52 AM: Two F-15s take off from Otis Air Force Base. [Washington Post, 9/15/01] They go after Flight 175. Major General Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, states "the pilots flew like a scalded ape, topping 500 mph but were unable to catch up to the airliner. We had a nine-minute window, and in excess of 100 miles to intercept 175,'' he said. ''There was just literally no way.'' [Dallas Morning News, 9/15/01] F-15's fly at up to 2.5 times the speed of sound [1875 mph or 30+ miles a minute or 270+ miles in nine minutes] and are designed for low-altitude, high-speed, precision attacks. [BBC]
look, i'm not saying this happened. i'm just saying it's an interesting video. my wife and i talked about "where's the plane???" at the pentagon on the day these events took place. hadn't thought about it much since. but everytime i see the pictures of the pentagon burning, it just never seems to me that a plane crashed there. i'm not saying it didn't...i don't know.
These videos, books, theories all offer this type of evidence (incidentally, snopes has some counterpoints to some of this stuff), however, one thing I haven't seen them mention is what actually happened to the plane if it didn't crash into the pentagon. No one has mentioned an alternate crash site. No one has any eyewitness reports of that flight being blown up or crashing elsewhere, so what happened to it?
what was cheney doing w/ NORAD on 9/11? and isnt it an amazing coincidence that NORAD was running training exercises on 9/11 that mirrored exactly what happened at the exact time that it happened? convenient how NORAD was preoccupied w/ a training drill whilst the real thing was going down. http://www.prisonplanet.com/agency_...t_around_a_plane_crashing_into_a_building.htm (yes, its alex jones, but the article is a link from yahoo, which is somewhat more legit). why were the f-16's not able to stop the plane that hit the pentagon, which happened about 45 minutes after the first plane hit the WTC? our country was under attack for 45 minutes and yet a jet plane was able to smash into our central military command, one of the few places in this country which should have been under high alert, and defened from the ground and air.
I only have my own beliefs based upon my own reading. And I may not be right. I don't believe physical evidence is the best way to test the truth in analyzing 9-11. Physical evidence can be misleading in both directions. And when so much of the evidence is classified by the govt. it is almost impossible to find the truth trying to construct a case of physical evidence. That is why I like the book "Crossing the Rubicon". It examines 9-11 from the point of view of a police detective (Ruppert= former narcotics officer) making an investigation of statements from suspects and witnesses. The evidence for motive, suspect and verdict are compelling in the research presented in this book. Physical evidence can be debunked and discredited, but overwhelming and conclusive testimony can convict anyone of a crime.
This addresses many of the issues including "where is the plane?" http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
You are looking at this backwards. You are starting from a preconceived notion that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. When you are investigating you start with "what happened". Show me any evidence that it did hit the Pentagon. Something hit the Pentagon, but show me an aircraft? Show me a film that shows that. We all heard the man on the TV say a plane hit the Pentagon, we had just seen videos of planes hitting the towers and we just believed. I've seen this tape before and mentioned it to friends of mine and most have said "no I saw a video of the plane hitting the Pentagon" and they aren't talking about that little clip on the video. I bet if you mention this to others you will find a similar reaction. This is something people will reject immediately because the alternative is almost unthinkable to most.
How about starting with Flight 77? What happened to it? Where is the wreckage if it didn't hit the Pentagon? Where are the eyewitness accounts of what happened to it if it didn't hit the Pentagon? I assume the conspiracy theorists would have us believe that the government shot it down. If that's the case, where did the wreckage fall? How did air traffic controllers not see it disappear from radar?
Again you are asking for answers while ignoring the only evidence that we do have. The Pentagon. You have to start an investigation from there. Just examine the evidence that we currently have. "I assume the conspiracy theorist would have us believe the government shot it down" - Again, reaching for a one possible final conclusion that is unthinkable is making you close off your mind to any evidence. You are reaching for "Miss Scarlet, with the candlestick in the Library." We are trying to find out if it is in deed in the Library.
If a plane slammed into the Pentagon on a bright clear morning, there would be many eyewitness accounts. And, of course, there are. Feel free to google them yourselves.
