The How Of 9/11 Revealed?

[Scotty CTA]

[Scotty CTA]

Seriously?

[Toepoke]

Seriously?

The damage was a bit worse than your photo suggests...

[thplinth]

Yes, that's right. You're not going to unwrite Bible prophecy.

I want people to know that there is hope in the face of imminent death in the person of Jesus Christ.

Nope, I'm saved regardless.

Not because of anything that I have done, but because of what Jesus did.

OK, my turn.

The person that I am (unintentionally) scaring is you.

You understand the truth in what I am saying, yet your rebellious heart can't humble itself enough to repent.

Like so many, you want the good things of this world without having to acknowledge the One responsible for your very existence.

The One Who is capable of loving you more than anyone.

The One Who does love you more than anyone.

Jesus didn't come to solve the world's problems.

He came to save His children from being eternally separated from Him.

This world will pass.

Time is short.

Seek God while you still can.

I'm not sure that there is anyone on here more honest or upfront (and copy and pasting Wikipedia won't change that).

Scotty inventing a certainty when there is none is the action of someone in fear. You 'know' but the truth is you don't. Your invented certainties are a comforter for you. They make you feel good but at a price. Once you start believing without proof it starts to creep into your other thinking. One act of faith leads into another and another...one required to prop the other and so on. Until you get to the point where you can be fooled into thinking someone has caught a live dinosaur. Because you desperately want it to be true to support your other articles of faith....It is like a disease eating your rationality.

I prefer to live with uncertainty, to embrace it for if there is a God uncertainty is very much part of their design. But again I don't know and neither do you. The difference is I live with the reality of the world and do not invent facts to make myself feel secure. The truth is people suddenly develop a belief in God when they are frightened, especially of death, that is why religion uses it so much. Why you use it so much.

You are not upfront for the reason I stated and that alone. You are peddling the Scofield bible and Dispensationalism and have been from the start but never once do you acknowledge it, in fact you try to obfuscate by saying you have no religion only faith etc. You also brag about how you will never be beaten on biblical interpretation, again without ever acknowledging you are using the Scofield bible reference notes. I think you hide this because you know folk will rightly baulk at it. And for that reason I find this a little deceptive.

Edited April 7, 2015 by thplinth

[Scotty CTA]

The damage was a bit worse than your photo suggests...

The 'plane' hits, and THEN there is a collapse.

The 'plane' hits...

..and THEN there is a collapse...

There's the damage from the impact of the 'plane', then there's damage done from the resulting 'fire'.

You showing a photo of the later collapse at the Pentagon was the end result of BOTH impact and 'fire'.

[Scotty CTA]

Scotty inventing a certainty when there is none is the action of someone in fear.

I didn't invent God.

I know Him and because of that I have no fear of the world.

You 'know' but the truth is you don't.

I do know that God exists.

Your invented certainties are a comforter for you.

I haven't invented anything, but yes, God is a tremendous comfort.

They make you feel good but at a price.

The price of being on the end of mocking and scoffing doesn't add up to a hill of beans.

Once you start believing without proof it starts to creep into your other thinking.

My faith in God has led to exposing the enemy's playbook.

Once you start believing without proof it starts to creep into your other thinking.

I can prove that 9/11 was a false flag easier than I can that God exists.

The thinking leads 'to', not 'away'.

Until you get to the point where you can be fooled into thinking someone has caught a live dinosaur.

I never consciously thought that though.

Because you desperately want it to be true to support your other articles of faith....It is like a disease eating your rationality.

I am rational. It's just that he truth is urgent.

"For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few." Matthew 7:14

(Now, that's 'scary'.)

[thplinth]

You know Scotty I actually recommended this book on the book thread a few days before you started this one. I liked the idea of using a pot boiler to reach people who would never normally read into 911. I have it on my kindle for reading although phart is putting me off a wee bit... I just don't see the need to take a theory and assert it as fact like somehow you know. I will let you know if I change my mind.

Have you read it, honestly. I ask because the article I saw on it was linked from infowars...a site you seem to take as...well gospel.

[phart]

read it ya dafty. I'm not trying to put anyone off reading anything, so apo0logies if that was happening.

[thplinth]

read it ya dafty. I'm not trying to put anyone off reading anything, so apo0logies if that was happening.

Oh I will. My upbringing in Aberdeen precludes my not reading a book I have purchased.

edit: and to be fair you have not put me off 1/100th as much as Scotty has. I think this is what has pissed me off!

Edited April 7, 2015 by thplinth

[Scotty CTA]

I watched the second Tower hit live on TV (while I was literally packing my bags to go through to Glasgow Airport).

I saw both Twin Towers collapse live. (The whole day was surreal, and a lot to take in.)

I just ended up believing what we were told in the MSM.

My friends were getting annoyed with me not having e-mail, so they put a computer system together for me using components of their old ones.

Another friend told me that 9/11 was an inside job, and that I should research it.

That was in 2003, and you've been hearing from me since.

As I began to 'wake up', I first went with the possibility of 2 planes being taken over by remote control and being flown into the Twin Towers with the other 2 sites not having planes at all.

The Pentagon was some sort of missile, and Shanksville was some sort of bunker buster.

Currently I'm going with all 4 planes being taken over remotely and landed, and I'm back to the drawing board as to what the 4 crashes were.

(Apparently the 'dancing Israeli's' filmed the impact into the North Tower. I would love to see that.)

Edited April 8, 2015 by Scotty CTA

[UPROAR]

if they were going to 'machine gun' a load of people from planes they had just landed then fly another 'remote control' plane in to the 'target' why not just have the passengers board 'remote control' planes in the first place then fly those into the buildings.

Some result and no mass graves.... ??

[GrantP]

The great owl demanded a sacrifice of blood not fire,,,,,

[Hertsscot]

In the midst of all this and in the light of the tragic German Wings flight there is an interesting and important debate about whether we want to have planes that are completely remote controlled. Would they be safer than piloted by humans, what would be the possibility of terrorists or govts hacking into them?

[UPROAR]

governments can hack anything - most security has back door already for them, its harder for terrorists....

unless they are the same people of course..

you could have some fun working out which is higher probability of disaster.

[Toepoke]

In the midst of all this and in the light of the tragic German Wings flight there is an interesting and important debate about whether we want to have planes that are completely remote controlled. Would they be safer than piloted by humans, what would be the possibility of terrorists or govts hacking into them?

Discussed at length here...

http://tartanarmyboard.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=3863&view=&hl=&fromsearch=1

[thplinth]

if they were going to 'machine gun' a load of people from planes they had just landed then fly another 'remote control' plane in to the 'target' why not just have the passengers board 'remote control' planes in the first place then fly those into the buildings.

Some result and no mass graves.... ??

To manufacture the cell phone calls apparently according to Scotty.

But I think this is wrong. There is no way they would complicate a plot like that to produce a few cell phone calls. It is ridiculous. I recall reading at the time that the calls were odd in some instances. I also recall that the technology for voice mimicing was already developed. So I think it is far more likely they would have faked the persons voice and faked the call. Why would you run the risk of having zero body parts or recoverable DNA at the crash sites, just to fake a few calls. You wouldnt, it would create far bigger problems for the plotters than the one it aimed to solve (sewing the muslim hijacker narrative), you would just fake the calls.

One thing the germanwings crash proves - flying a plane at 500 mph into a mountain does still yield usable black boxes. You have to think those 911 black boxes were recoverable.

[Fairbairn]

Out of interest, and I genuinely don't know the answer to this, were any bodies/body parts recovered from the German Wings crash?

[jailender]

As far as I know, they recovered DNA strands from around 100 different sources(this figure may have risen as search continued for some days after this was announced) . Don't think any actual bodies were recovered, just parts.

[Scotty CTA]

if they were going to 'machine gun' kill a load of people from planes they had just landed then fly another 'remote control' plane in to the 'target' why not just have the passengers board 'remote control' planes in the first place then fly those into the buildings.

Some result and no mass graves.... ??

Landing the planes by remote control ensured the phone calls confirming who the 'enemy' was because 'justification' for war was crucial.

These calls were made possible in part by handlers on the planes (who wouldn't have been on board if the planes were to be crashed).

And tbh, I don't think that normal planes could do what we were led to believe happened at the Twin Towers.

[Scotty CTA]

To manufacture the cell phone calls apparently according to Scotty.

But I think this is wrong. There is no way they would complicate a plot like that to produce a few cell phone calls.

It was vital for them to capitalise on the emotion of people saying good-bye to their loved ones to get the public behind the invasion.

I recall reading at the time that the calls were odd in some instances.

They were told to be convincing and to say that they were in the air.

"'Mom, this is Mark Bingham. I just want to tell you that I love you. I am on a flight from Newark to San Francisco. There are three guys on board who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb. You believe me don't you, Mom? I'm calling you from the air phone."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Northeast/06/04/911.calls/index.html

I also recall that the technology for voice mimicing was already developed. So I think it is far more likely they would have faked the persons voice and faked the call.

I believe that the calls were made by the actual people.

Why would you run the risk of having zero body parts or recoverable DNA at the crash sites...

That's outwith our control either way.

They tell us what's what (as it's a closed and controlled area) and the sheeple believe.

Why would you run the risk....

Faking voices runs more risk than using real voices IMHO.

[phart]

Out of interest, and I genuinely don't know the answer to this, were any bodies/body parts recovered from the German Wings crash?

Yeah i posted a link about it earlier in the debate, they had identified 78 strands of DNA at the time a few days into the crash, not sure how many now.

#

EDIT from hundreds of body parts.

Edited April 8, 2015 by phart

[thplinth]

It was vital for them to capitalise on the emotion of people saying good-bye to their loved ones to get the public behind the invasion.

They were told to be convincing and to say that they were in the air.

"'Mom, this is Mark Bingham. I just want to tell you that I love you. I am on a flight from Newark to San Francisco. There are three guys on board who have taken over the plane and they say they have a bomb. You believe me don't you, Mom? I'm calling you from the air phone."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Northeast/06/04/911.calls/index.html

I believe that the calls were made by the actual people.

That's outwith our control either way.

They tell us what's what (as it's a closed and controlled area) and the sheeple believe.

Faking voices runs more risk than using real voices IMHO.

If I had to bet I think they were real people as well, but on the planes describing what they saw.

If the calls were faked I'd hesitantly bet that they did it using voice morphing technology coupled with eavesdropping in on the person to be faked beforehand for period to identify their mannerism of speech.

I just can't take this other theory seriously at all. I'll see if I find it any more convincing when I get round to reading the book.

[phart]

I just find it weird that crowd-funded journalists and activists are descending on congress in the next 7 days to demand the 28 pages redacted in the "JIS" report in which forgein governmentS are implicated, with one thought to be Saudi and the other Israel. Especially Israel massive pressure to release names of what Israeli's were doing, why they were caught with explosives etc. This is the first real concerted effort to prise the lid off Israeli involvement. Suddenly you see this book getting promoted which says yes Israel did it and they did it by this fantastic story of replacing planes, mowing folk down, making them do forced calls(someone might blurt out i;m being kidnapped then the whole thing is fecked anyway, yeah let's make a plan where one blurt out contradicts the whole story, same with one forensic scientist and it's over) massive conspiracy involving air-bases, 4 separate sites entire personnel in on the act. False blips inserted in RADAR and the Garden of Eden is involved.

Looks like a classic case of dis-info to me. Not sure about anyone else.

Edited April 8, 2015 by phart

[thplinth]

I just find it weird that crowd-funded journalists and activists are descending on congress in the next 7 days to demand the 28 pages redacted in the "JIS" report in which forgein governmentS are implicated, with one thought to be Saudi and the other Israel. Especially Israel massive pressure to release names of what Israeli's were doing, why they were caught with explosives etc. This is the first real concerted effort to prise the lid off Israeli involvement. Suddenly you see this book getting promoted which says yes Israel did it and they did it by this fantastic story of replacing planes, mowing folk down, making them do forced calls(someone might blurt out i;m being kidnapped then the whole thing is fecked anyway, yeah let's make a plan where one blurt out contradicts the whole story, same with one forensic scientist and it's over) massive conspiracy involving air-bases, 4 separate sites entire personnel in on the act. False blips inserted in RADAR and the Garden of Eden is involved.

Looks like a classic case of dis-info to me. Not sure about anyone else.

Exactly. The blurt out risk alone makes it a ridiculous plan. Just one of them to say 'we landed at a airbase help' and the whole plan is kunted. I agree with your view. It stinks of disinformation.

[daddybuc16]

Does the german wings crash not show that a human being intent on killing himself and others, either for a cause or because of their own personal demons is capable of flying a plane into a structure? Aye, there are discrepancies in the official story, but 9/11 is what it is 4 planes, 3 of which were slammed into buildings and the other was brought down in some way. Folk that go on about this sort of stuff, maybe not yourself scotty, but others are not happy unless they see the dead people scattered all over the place. And if they don't then they can fill in the blanks to their hearts content, they say that the illuminati n governments don't care, but they don't seem to care about the families left behind after things like this when they publish stuff on the internet of as fact.

You are saying that it was to justify the war in afghanistan/iraq? But have you ever stopped to consider that they might have wanted the fight? Or are they the innocent/good guys here.

Btw i'm not saying that i agree with this constant war in the middle east.