Go Back   Club Conspiracy Forums > General Conspiracy Discussion > General Conspiracy Discussion
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-28-2007, 07:04 PM
redrat11 redrat11 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,230
Default Re: U.S. District Court Unseals 9/11 "Inside Job" Case


Quote:
BlueAngel wrote:
Quote:
redrat11 wrote:
Yeah, it was a "inside job" alright, but not the people you 'think' are involved.

http://www.mitre.org/about/ffrdcs/c3i.html

Customers

The DOD C3I FFRDC supports a broad base of customers within the DOD and intelligence community, including:

Air Force
Army
Navy
Marine Corps
Defense Information Systems Agency
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Missile Defense Agency
Unified Commands
Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Office of the Secretary of Defense
Military Intelligence Agencies
Other Members of the National Security Community
To work hand-in-hand with our clients, MITRE staff members work at sites around the world.



http://www.mitre.org/about/ffrdcs/c3i.html
So, what are you saying, RedRat?

Can you sum it up for the readers, please?
Maybe, maybe not. I leave it up to the reader to read what has already been written on the subject and come to a conclusion themselves. it would take a giant post to "add everything up" I'm tired today.

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-28-2007, 07:57 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: U.S. District Court Unseals 9/11 "Inside Job" Case

I was asking you to sum up what you posted and it's relation to the topic at hand.

Apparently, you cannot do that.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-29-2007, 09:40 PM
CB_Brooklyn CB_Brooklyn is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26
Default Re: U.S. District Court Unseals 9/11 "Inside Job" Case

Quote:
BlueAngel wrote:
The airplanes did not glide through the towers. They were hanging out of the towers.

As far as your cartoon comment, it's over my head.


You are wrong. All videos show the plane gliding in, from plastic nosecone to aluminum tail. And they were not "hanging out" of the towers.

As far as the cartoon idea being over your head, read this article:


Technology Review Magazine Discusses How the Military and TV Networks
Can Insert Prerecorded Images Into Live News Feed to Alter World Politics
in their July/August 2000 Article "Lying With Pixels":

http://www.911researchers.com/node/174
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-29-2007, 10:14 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: U.S. District Court Unseals 9/11 "Inside Job" Case

Yes, the planes were hanging out of the towers. Saw it with my own eyes on the stock market channel. Think it was 67. The plane was hanging out of the building and the tower was burning.

There are plenty of videos of this on the web.

It was reported that a small plane hit the tower at that point.

Most videos you supply show smoke and not the aircraft hanging out of the building.

These are available.

I'm sure video can be altered; however, that was not what I addressed in your post.

I specifically questioned the FEDERAL CASE.

You are not addressing my questions, but rather directing the discussion to the planes.

That is not the point.

My questions remain the same.

I will not repeat them.

I have listed them in a previous post.

I am not going to discuss what hit the towers and what didn't.

THE FACT remains that something brought the towers down and thousands of innocent people were murdered on September 11, 2001 with the cooperation of the United States of America when a Stand Down of the US Military was called.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-29-2007, 11:12 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: U.S. District Court Unseals 9/11 "Inside Job" Case

AGAIN!!

THERE IS A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE ENTITIES WHO INVESTIGATED 911 BECAUSE IT IS BELIEVED THAT WHAT THEY REPORTED WAS FRADULENT AND, DUE TO THIS FACT, THE US GOVERNMENT HAS SUFFERED FINANCIAL LOSS.

Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?

If not, I suggest you read it over and over again until you come to your senses.

THEY REPORTED FALSEHOODS BECAUSE THEY WERE A PART OF THE COVER-UP FOR THE US GOVERNMENT AND BECAUSE THEY'RE ON THEIR PAYROLL.

I ASSURE YOU THAT ANY CREDIBLE 911 RESEARCHERS EXPOSING THE TRUTH ABOUT 911 WOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN A LAWSUIT THAT BENEFITS THE US GOVERNMENT.

Who is going to pay the US government if they are victorious in this lawsuit?

THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WERE DEDRAUDED BY THE US GOVERNMENT ON 911 WHEN THEY MURDERD THOUSANDS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE!

COME BACK AND TELL US WHEN THAT LAWSUIT HAS BEEN FILED.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-30-2007, 07:05 AM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: U.S. District Court Unseals 9/11 "Inside Job" Case

So, CB, this brings up some very good questions.

Particularly, how did the aircraft that hit the towers penetrate concrete or, as you say, glide through the towers?

Wouldn't that be similar to a train traveling at 600 miles per hour and slamming into a concrete wall?

Would the train penetrate the wall?

In the case of the towers, I was watching CNBC and Mark something or other was reporting that a small plane crashed into the first tower.

The image of this plane was shown with the back section hanging out of the tower and the nose and part of the front section inside the building. There was fire around it before the explosion/detonation.

I watched it hang, "suspend" from mid-air for what seemed like five minutes or longer.

How could this be?

The front section went through the concrete and was resting on something and the back section didn't break apart after having just slammed into a concrete wall?

Why didn't this aircraft crumble like an accordian and plummet to the ground after slamming at what 600 mph into a concrete building with reinforced steel?

How many feet above the ground was the first plane that hit?

Whatever that distance, we'd have to assume that it was traveling at that altitude before it slammed into the tower.

Didn't anyone on the ground hear the noise this plane would have generated flying so low through the street of New York?

Did anyone look up and see this plane slam into the tower?

WHERE ARE THE VIDEOS THAT SHOW THE FIRST PLANE HANGING OUT OF THE TOWER?

Are you telling me that the only videos that exist are of planes GLIDING through the towers and an immediate crumbling of the buildings. That would be ridiculous.

How could a plane glide through the building and cause an immediate crumbling of the towers if it weren't for a detonation?

You'll have to find this Mark person and everyone else who was reporting this on 911.

I certainly am not the only person who was watching the "stock market" channel that day.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
US District Court Unseals Second 9/11 'Inside Job' Case CB_Brooklyn General Conspiracy Discussion 0 10-12-2007 11:52 PM
the case of johnny gosch General Conspiracy Discussion 5 09-13-2006 02:09 PM
Case for Christ Stranger Opinions 2 09-03-2006 09:40 PM
Digital fingerprint cracks the case igwt What is really going on? 1 10-24-2005 08:20 PM
Just another case of combat fatigue? freeman What is really going on? 1 08-15-2005 08:39 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.