Weird...

Technology, computers, sciences, mysteries and phenomena of all kinds, etc., etc. all here at The Loresraat!!

Moderator: Vraith

User avatar
Alynna Lis Eachann
Lord
Posts: 3060
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2002 8:23 pm
Location: Maryland, my Maryland

Post by Alynna Lis Eachann »

Someone in... I think it was the Washington Post article, said something I'm inclined to agree with: If you've worked in government, you know that government is not organized enough to pull off a conspiracy. At least one on this scale.
There are a few things about the 9/11 attacks that I have always thought were a odd though, namely that the WTC and Pentagon strikes would require exceptional flying on the part of the hijackers. Especially when we're led to believe that flight 93 crashed because the hijackers lost control whilst rolling the plane to subdue the passengers.
See, this flying lessons thing has always bothered me. I don't think they needed to be exceptional pilots, I just think they needed to know how to bank and fly in a straight line at a really, really big target. Still, the controls of a multi-engine passenger plane are a lot more complex than, say, a four-passenger Cessna, so I can see where years of flight school come into it. Because apparently you need some finesse to fly squarely into the middle of a building instead of just clipping it. Imagine how sluggish the controls of a airplane that big must be.

We got any pilots here? All I have to base my comments on are a few years of home flight simulators and skimming through a ground school student pilot book.... I really need to go sign up for lessons.
"We probably could have saved ourselves, but we were too damned lazy to try very hard... and too damn cheap." - Kurt Vonnegut

"Now if you remember all great paintings have an element of tragedy to them. Uh, for instance if you remember from last week, the unicorn was stuck on the aircraft carrier and couldn't get off. That was very sad. " - Kids in the Hall
User avatar
Alynna Lis Eachann
Lord
Posts: 3060
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2002 8:23 pm
Location: Maryland, my Maryland

Post by Alynna Lis Eachann »

Right, sorry for the double post, but I was listening to coverage of the Moussaui trial on NPR and they said something in regards to this:
Nav wrote: Especially when we're led to believe that flight 93 crashed because the hijackers lost control whilst rolling the plane to subdue the passengers.
From what they read of the transcript from the black box, it appears that the terrorists didn't lose control of the plane, but crashed it on purpose when the passengers wouldn't settle down after the rolls.
"We probably could have saved ourselves, but we were too damned lazy to try very hard... and too damn cheap." - Kurt Vonnegut

"Now if you remember all great paintings have an element of tragedy to them. Uh, for instance if you remember from last week, the unicorn was stuck on the aircraft carrier and couldn't get off. That was very sad. " - Kids in the Hall
User avatar
Loredoctor
Lord
Posts: 18609
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2002 11:35 pm
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Contact:

Post by Loredoctor »

That's so odd.
Waddley wrote:your Highness Sir Dr. Loredoctor, PhD, Esq, the Magnificent, First of his name, Second Cousin of Dragons, White-Gold-Plate Wielder!
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 48363
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Post by sgt.null »

why? i've heard that theory before. but the heroic ending sounds better.
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

If they were supposed to be crashing it into something, why do it beforehand, and deliberately? Would have been easier and more effective to start killing passengers.

Would they really waste a shot as it were on crashing because the passengers wouldn't settle down?

--A
User avatar
Loredoctor
Lord
Posts: 18609
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2002 11:35 pm
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Contact:

Post by Loredoctor »

Avatar wrote: Would have been easier and more effective to start killing passengers.
There are only so many passengers. And anyway, killing off passengers would cause a riot.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

But they didn't need any passengers, but they did need the plane.

To crash it because the passengers wouldn't settle down was an utter waste, if we are to assume that they planned to crash it into another target.

--A
User avatar
Nav
Lord
Posts: 2137
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 5:03 pm
Location: Surrey - Home of Baseball

Post by Nav »

I don't know, remember that they were only armed with box cutters. You can probably hold a box cutter to someone's throat to get others to cooperate, but there's no way you could kill 100+ people armed solely with them. Their plan was probably dependent on the passengers assuming they were going to land the plane and start making demands (the traditional plane hijacking scenario up until 9/11) rather than fly it into something. Once the passengers got wind of what had happened in New York they would surely have tried to overpower the hijackers and the hijackers simply lacked the means to contain a large group of them.

Heard the transcripts of the Black box on the news last night. Horrible.
Q. Why do Communists drink herbal tea?
A. Because proper tea is theft.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

A good point of course. I'd have to assume that they tried everything else if they crashed it simply because they couldn't control the passengers. (I thought that plane only had about 30 passengers though? (Could well be wrong.)

Still seems like a foolish move though.

--A
User avatar
Alynna Lis Eachann
Lord
Posts: 3060
Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2002 8:23 pm
Location: Maryland, my Maryland

Post by Alynna Lis Eachann »

No, Nav's right. All they had was box cutters and the threat of a bomb. If they wanted to become martyrs, or even just not have their part of the plan be a wash, they would have thought it better to kill as many people as they could rather than fail and let themselves be captured. They never would have held those people off long enough to land, and they knew it.
"We probably could have saved ourselves, but we were too damned lazy to try very hard... and too damn cheap." - Kurt Vonnegut

"Now if you remember all great paintings have an element of tragedy to them. Uh, for instance if you remember from last week, the unicorn was stuck on the aircraft carrier and couldn't get off. That was very sad. " - Kids in the Hall
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

They weren't trying to land. ;) No, I see your point, truly I do. I suppose it's easy to second guess. I can't help thinking that if I'd been hijacking it, I would have thought of something to subdue them. *shrug*

--A
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 6 times

Post by wayfriend »

CNN: First video of Pentagon 9/11 attack released
Watchdog group says video will end 'conspiracy theories'
The funny thing about the video is that it doesn't actually show anything that contradicts any conspiracies - there's one frame of a blur that they point to and say, see, that's the plane. Even the most reasonable sceptics agree that this videp dispels nothing.
.
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19845
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Zarathustra »

Did anyone see the movie Flight 93? Sure, it could be pure Hollywood fantasy. But it makes a plausible case for why the hijackers would have crashed the plane . . . they simply couldn't control the passengers. They were on a suicide mission. They wouldn't give up control and let themselves be captured.

There is also the evidence of the recently released transcripts of the final 10 minutes. Most of the dialogue is the terrorists telling the passengers to sit down. Over and over. They obviously spent much of their time trying to subdue the passengers. And it is also clear that they failed to do so.
Success will be my revenge -- DJT
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

And here's the next installment of the conspiracy theories: A conference. :lol:
9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Gather

Los Angeles - They wore T-shirts asking "What Really Happened?"; snapped up DVDs titled 9/11; The Great Illusion, and cheered as physicists, philosophers and terrorism experts decried the official version of the September 11 attacks that shook America to its core.

About 1 200 people gathered at a Los Angeles hotel over the weekend for what organisers billed as the largest conference on the plethora of conspiracy theories that see the 2001 attacks on Washington and New York as, at best, official negligence, and at worst an orchestrated US attempt to incite world war.

"There are so many prominent people who are incredibly well-respected who have stated that the evidence is overwhelming that 9/11 was an inside job," syndicated radio talk show host Alex Jones told a news conference.

Smoking guns

"There are hundreds of smoking guns that people need to be made aware of," said Jones, calling for the impeachment of President George W Bush and charging that mainstream media had been slow to cover the growing movement of 9/11 sceptics.

The "9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda" conference comprised two days of seminars, video presentations and talks by groups including "Scholars for 9/11 Truth," www.infowars.com and an appearance by actor Charlie Sheen.

Most are convinced the US military command "stood down" on the day of the attack, that the hijackers were trained at American military bases, and that the World Trade Centre towers collapsed because of a series of controlled explosions set before they were hit by two hijacked planes.

Suggested motives range from expected benefits for US arms and oil conglomerates to revolutionary plans for a new world order headed by the United States.

Did US leaders know in advance?

The theories, derided by critics as wild and far-fetched, have mostly been confined to the internet, talk radio and the alternative press.

But an August 2004 Zogby opinion poll revealed 49% of New York City residents believed US leaders knew in advance of the attacks and failed to act.

The official 9/11 Commission, set up in 2002, cited government intelligence lapses in the failure to prevent the attacks by al-Qaeda that killed about 3 000 people.

A 10 000-page investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology held that jet-fuel fires weakened the structure of the Twin Towers and led to their collapse.

'Bad things happening '

Sheen provoked a media storm in March by calling in interviews for an independent investigation.

Sheen "brings the movement some legitimacy. He gives it a face," said a Los Angeles student.

"Rational, well-educated people are starting to take a look at all this and are seeing there are some pretty bad things happening," he added.

Webster Tarpley, author of 9/11 Synthetic Terror; Made in USA, said the September 11 attacks were an example of "state-sponsored, false-flag terrorism" designed by rogue CIA elements "to start the war of civilisations."

Tarpley said Washington was "gripped by war psychosis" and had used terror as a pretext to turn the United States into a police state.
--A
Post Reply

Return to “The Loresraat”