See other 9/11 Articles
Title: New Evidence suggests 'hijackers' had no plans to die
Source:
Loose Change Forum/NTSB reports
URL Source: http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_C ... orum/index.php?showtopic=10429
Published: Aug 13, 2006
Author: valis
Post Date: 2006-08-13 07:00:03 by valis
Ping List: *9-11* Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: hijackers, return, airport
Views: 1189
Comments: 34
New evidence, albeit government evidence, suggests that there were indeed 'hijackers' (or someone playing hijackers)... that had no plans to die on 9/11. I bet they were a bit surprised ...to say the least. Of course, the government conspiracy theorists will say that manipulating his own agents was part of Tim Osman's master cave-hatched plan.
(2 images)
NTSB report, Air Traffic Control Recording-United Airlines Flight 93, Dec. 21, 2001"We will go back to the airport and have our demands so please remain quiet"
NTSB report, Air Traffic Control Recording-American Airlines Flight 11, Dec. 21, 2001"Nobody move please we are going back to the airport don't try to make any stupid moves"
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#2. To: valis (#0)
Um, what hijackers? Lewin and Avraham?
Good question. "Let's discuss the 9/11 hijackers" "Or were there hijackers?" - A rebuttal
"Let's discuss the 9/11 hijackers" If you want to discuss it then do so here, stop trying to hijack people to your site.
I have remained on the forum for a couple of years now, despite abrasivnesss to any and all the work from Scholars for 9/11 Truth that I have tried to share with those on this forum. I guess that will now change. I hope the collective gatekeepers here do not take this as a sign of victory, but simply as a sign that my resources are being wasted here.
#7. To: valis (#6)
collective gatekeepers?????? I would like a list of these posters here.
Would you like some cheese to go with that wine? Gatekeepers? Say what you have to say and quit asking for permission or protection, you know the drill. Carry on........or not.
I like your site and the work you have done along with posting all evidence and all theroies about 911. There is alot that I don't buy into, and I'm not going tell someone not to post about them. Some of the stuff going around is just garbage. The Loose Change forums have the most credible info overall going. Most there won't go into fission bombs and other stuff. Their final cut will disappoint a bunch because it won't go into nuclear devices, pods, naplam, lasers, detonation engines etc.. Mark
This is not a stand alone 911 site. While it is discussed here, and almost all are on board about government involvement, it isn't the main topic. I come here to read about other topics that the members here focus on that I don't, and there are some true expert researchers on other subjects. My main reading is on 911, but I like to keep abreast of the ME, NAU, the war, zionism, the NWO, the economy, and other national and global issues. But, make no mistake, if you are not happy here, don't let the door hit you on the way out. Mark
Valis? collective gatekeepers? I have no idea who and what you're talking about. Please cite names and posts! We have Scholars for Truth (as well as Awoken) linked in our Associates category! Kamala, Arator, Freedom William, and I went to the 911 Symposium where Jim Fetzer and Stephen Jones were keynote speakers in June, for pete's sake! We have posted vast amounts of information ourselves from their site, http://ST911.org. We have enormous respect for them on Freedom4um. I'm stunned, really, that this is your point of view.
Um...valis, this is F4, not LP or FR. Most posters here are awake to 9-11 truth, regard Scholars for 9-11 Truth as the heroic tip of the spear of the 9- 11 Truth movement and have high regard for you, your posts and your website. So, who (or what) are you talking about? Please clarify your seeming slur against the posters of this forum.
Oh, I just noticed RickyJ's nasty post to you about not linking to your site. As far as I know, RickyJ only speaks for RickyJ. I don't know what his problem is, but it has nothing to do with F4 or the rest of the posters here.
Not likely since this forum didn't even start until January 2005. When you post far out material that clearly looks like disinfo material expect people to speak up, don't you care about the truth? That David Hawkins guy with his missiles in the elevator shafts theory was just too much. If you are trying to get people to believe theories that clearly are trying to discredit the 9/11 truth movement then yes I would definitely hope your resources are being wasted here. If you are not doing that, but instead are naively posting such material then why do you think your resources are being wasted here if you are being alerted to possible disinfo material? You do know there is plenty of disinfo material out there about 9/11, right? So why do you take it so personal when people point out they think an article is such material. Look, I don't know anything about you except what you have posted on LF and now here and a few other 9/11 forums that I have visited. Honestly from what I have read about theories you seem to be promoting leads me to not trust you as a genuine 9/11 truther. That's why I wanted to discuss the article here, I don't really trust you to have my IP address. Sorry if that offends you. I trust Christine and Zipporah, I could be wrong in doing so, but they have never given me a reason not to trust them.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#3. To: Eoghan (#2)
Um, what hijackers?
http://valis.cjb.cc/hijackers.html
http://valis.cjb.cc/hijackers4.html
#5. To: valis (#3)
Good question.
#6. To: RickyJ (#5)
Replies to Comment # 6. abrasivnesss??????
#9. To: valis (#6)
I hope the collective gatekeepers here do not take this as a sign of victory, but simply as a sign that my resources are being wasted here.
#10. To: valis (#6)
#11. To: valis (#6)
#12. To: valis (#6)
#13. To: valis (#6)
I have remained on the forum for a couple of years now, despite abrasivnesss to any and all the work from Scholars for 9/11 Truth that I have tried to share with those on this forum.
#14. To: valis, RickyJ (#6)
#27. To: valis, christine (#6)
I have remained on the forum for a couple of years now,
despite abrasivnesss to any and all the work from Scholars for 9/11 Truth that I have tried to share with those on this forum.
I guess that will now change. I hope the collective gatekeepers here do not take this as a sign of victory, but simply as a sign that my resources are being wasted here.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.