Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Bedtime Stories From Your 9/11 Commission

  1. Nov 30, 2004 #1
    I found this article from the archives of one of the websites provided by Plover. There are three other related articles by the same author.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 30, 2004 #2

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    More conspiracy theory? Haven't we had enough baseless conjecture for a while?
     
  4. Nov 30, 2004 #3
    Find the plane and win 20 U$S!!!

    http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/blue11.jpg
    http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/images/10.jpg
    http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/photos/docs/blue6.jpg

    ------------------------------------------------------
    All the proof you need:
    http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm
    -------------------------------------------------------
    Physical and mathematical analysis of Pentagon crash
    http://www.thewebfairy.com/911/holmgren/summary.html

    The report concludes:
    It is physically impossible for all of the plane to have entered the crash site, and this is backed by solid mathematical proof.

    I invite the people of this forum to refute or confirm this investigations,, it's nothing more than math, and physics...
    ---------------------------------------------------------
     
  5. Nov 30, 2004 #4
    and this is how BBC and other media, discredit and make it a "Crazy Conspiracy theory" without giving proof or refuting any investigations:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1907955.stm

    A book which argues that American Airlines flight 77 did not crash into the Pentagon on 11 September has become an immediate bestseller in France.

    A Pentagon spokesman, Glen Flood, described the book as "a slap in the face and real offence to the American people, particularly to the memory of victims of the attacks".

    But Mr Meyssan's provocative theories have proved irresistible to the French public

    But French media reports have mocked Mr Meyssan - who is president of the respected left-leaning think tank Reseau Voltaire - and compared his book with the Roswell alien

    Liberation slammed the book as "a tissue of wild allegations".

    "But the events of 11 September gave us a reality so similar to science fiction, that there has been more of a market for paranoid interpretations."

    "This theory suits everyone - there are no Islamic extremists... everyone is happy. It eliminates reality."
    ------------------------------------------

    What is more strange is that any other new from the media arise when we search in google: "Pentagon Crash"
    -------------------------------------------------------------
    'Crimestop' as described by Orwell vs. Bandler NLP (Diaries)

    He set to work to exercise himself in crimestop. He presented himself with propositions -- 'the Party says the earth is flat', 'the party says that ice is heavier than water' -- and trained himself in not seeing or not understanding the arguments that contradicted them. It was not easy. It needed great powers of reasoning and improvisation. The arithmetical problems raised, for instance, by such a statement as 'two and two make five' were beyond his intellectual grasp. It needed also a sort of athleticism of mind, an ability at one moment to make the most delicate use of logic and at the next to be unconscious of the crudest logical errors. Stupidity was as necessary as intelligence, and as difficult to attain.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2004
  6. Nov 30, 2004 #5

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Couldn't have said it better myself.
     
  7. Nov 30, 2004 #6
    That was fast...... btw.. did you even look at the links???

    -------------------------------------------------------------
    'Crimestop' as described by Orwell vs. Bandler NLP (Diaries)

    He set to work to exercise himself in crimestop. He presented himself with propositions -- 'the Party says the earth is flat', 'the party says that ice is heavier than water' -- and trained himself in not seeing or not understanding the arguments that contradicted them. It was not easy. It needed great powers of reasoning and improvisation. The arithmetical problems raised, for instance, by such a statement as 'two and two make five' were beyond his intellectual grasp. It needed also a sort of athleticism of mind, an ability at one moment to make the most delicate use of logic and at the next to be unconscious of the crudest logical errors. Stupidity was as necessary as intelligence, and as difficult to attain.
     
  8. Nov 30, 2004 #7

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I skimmed them - they are just regurgitations of the same conspiracy theories that have been thoroughly debunked in the past. We even have a thread on it from a couple of months ago. That's one of the properties of a conspiracy theorist: ignore all rebuttals and just keep repeating the same nonsense over and over as if it has merrit.

    The other common property is argument from (willful) ignorance:

    -'I'm not an expert, but it doesn't look to me like that damage could have been done by a 757.'
    -'I'm not an expert, but I'd think a plane crash would leave a lot of identifiable pieces of the plane.'

    Yeah, you're right - you're not an expert - and not even an informed layperson.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2004
  9. Nov 30, 2004 #8
    Its the worst you can do, trying to use common sense on something you know nothing about. If you guys did some more research on this, you would find the pictures of the crash site, with the 757 engine, the nose, the landing wheels and parts of the wings with the logo of American airlines, and many other parts. I posted them in a thread about this dumb conspiracy a few months ago.
     
  10. Nov 30, 2004 #9
    There was a bomb in the WTC too!! :wink:
     
  11. Nov 30, 2004 #10
    haven't you read the northwood documents?

    Page 1 of File (Memorandum)
    13 March 1962

    MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

    Subject: Justification for US Military Intervention in Cuba

    Page 10-11 of File (page 7-8 of Joint Chiefs report)

    A series of well coordinated incidents will be planned to take place in and around Guantanamo to give genuine appearance of being done by hostile Cuban forces.

    (1) Start rumors (many). Use clandestine radio.
    (2) Land friendly Cubans in uniform “over-the-fence” to stage attack on base.
    (3) Capture Cuban (friendly) saboteurs inside the base.
    (4) Start riots near the base main gate (friendly Cubans).
    (5) Blow up ammunition inside the base: start fires.
    (6) Burn aircraft on air base (sabotage).
    (7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base into base.
    (8) Capture assault teams approaching from the sea or vicinity of Guantanamo City.
    (9) Capture militia group which storms base.
    (10) Sabotage ship in harbor; large fires – naphthalene.
    (11) Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals for mock-victims.

    We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba. Casualty lists in US newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation. We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington.

    Page 13 of File (page 10 of Joint Chiefs report)

    Hijacking attempts against civil air and surface craft should appear to continue as harassing measures condoned by the government of Cuba.

    It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute from the United States. The destination would be chosen only to cause the flight plan to cross Cuba. The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday

    An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to a CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At the designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual aircraft would be converted to a drone.

    The drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will be transmitting on the international distress frequency a “MAY DAY” message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal.
    -----------------------------------
    Of course it have never been done.. but they had the idea...
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2004
  12. Nov 30, 2004 #11
    Good job bolding the unimportant part:

     
  13. Nov 30, 2004 #12

    loseyourname

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    I thought Polly and Plover were ardent statist-socialists. What are they doing referencing Lew Rockwell?
     
  14. Nov 30, 2004 #13
    This is my favorite "proof":

    [​IMG]
    Wait, you are going to tell me that two cameras take pictures at different resolutions and two different color balances under two different lightings...and that two pictures, both manipulated to be put online actually have different aspects as well??? I can hardly believe it myself!
     
  15. Nov 30, 2004 #14
    I agree in that point, it sounded stupit to me too..

    anyway i still think there something wrong with the pentagon. it has too little news coverage. but what most surprise me, is the fact that the pentagon is supposed to be one of the most secured buildings in the world... at least from there are directed the military operations of the most powerfull nation of the world.. and they didn't see a plane comming, not in the airliners radar,, not in the military radars... even after 2 planes crashed in the WTC... and we can only see 1 video from the crash moment, and it is a very difuse one... i can imagine i the pentagon there should be docens of cameras... why can't we ear what is in the black boxes, to many secrecy.... and it's hardly to belive a plane crash in there, look at the floor.. look at te front of the building.... and look at the northwood documents... it's the perfect excuse.. who stands to gain??? osama?? or bush???
     
  16. Dec 1, 2004 #15
    I looked at the front of the building, i dont see how its impossible for a 757 to have flown into it. The size fits, the rubble is there, and theres witnesses.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Bedtime Stories From Your 9/11 Commission
  1. 9/11; who cares! (Replies: 39)

  2. Pentagon Strike 9-11 (Replies: 2)

Loading...