this thread is chock full of stupid.

(and I'm in on page 4)




[Edited on October 27, 2007 at 7:07 PM. Reason : ]

10/27/2007 7:06:59 PM

agreed

10/27/2007 7:10:22 PM

Quote :

"I don't know... maybe something along the lines of setting up an ILS beacon on the towers so that the plains could succesfully navigate into them. Its not that easy to fly a Passenger airliner into a designated building. Especially at the speeds they travel. What do you think these terrorists did? Ok, NYC is South East of us...lets just fly in that direction."

It's pretty well documented that they had purchased hand held aviation GPS units to help them navigate. Atta even went to the WTC in the days prior to 9/11, presumably to verify the coordinates. They were also familiar with the cockpits of the planes that they hijacked. I've only got a PPL and I feel confident that I could hit a building with a plane.

10/27/2007 7:13:49 PM

a Cesna sure...but not a 737 or 767

10/27/2007 7:23:51 PM

They familiarized themselves with large aircraft by watching flight deck videos and renting simulator time. Once you get past the technological gap the mechanics are the same.

10/27/2007 7:31:27 PM

its still not a cesna. The controls and maneuverability are very very different...don't kid yourself in thinking they are the same.

10/27/2007 7:52:01 PM

I never said that it was a Cessna. I said that the mechanics are the same. Keep in mind that they didn't need to learn take off or landing, they just needed to know how to point the plane in a direction.

It's not the tremendous leap that you're making it out to be.

10/27/2007 7:59:56 PM

omg conspiracy theoracy

10/27/2007 8:34:58 PM

After reading most of these 4 pages, here's the peach.

Quote :

"3. These conspiracy theories are nothing more than the typical blame-America-first rubbish from bug-eyed left-wing potbangers."

10/27/2007 8:41:07 PM

^^^you're right and since I've been playing M$ Flight Simulator since the very first release...I can easily fly a 737 or 767 and navigate it into a building

[Edited on October 27, 2007 at 8:42 PM. Reason : ...]

10/27/2007 8:41:19 PM

Because thats exactly what I said, dipshit.

10/27/2007 9:01:20 PM

Quote :

"you sound like a "W The President" kind of person. How many of those stickers do you have on your car"

ok, i get it now. stupid me. gg, troll

10/27/2007 9:23:37 PM

^^no, thats exactly what you made it sound like...that in order to crash a airliner into a building all you need is a few hours of simulator training and thats it. Navigating and controlling the plane with the yoke/joystick is a walk in the park.

10/27/2007 9:39:41 PM

It doesn't sound like that at all, you're just being an idiot. The hijackers were already pilots that could fly proficiently enough to be commercially licensed (which requires upwards of 250 hours of flying time). After familiarizing themselves with the operation of an aircraft then there is no reason why they wouldn't be able to crash it into a building.

10/27/2007 10:00:12 PM

Quote :

"^^I'm guessing you also think that once they hi-jacked the planes...each terrorist pulled out his handy garman and put in "WTC" for destination. "

Ahaha...Aim for the tallest building in the New York City sky line...not that hard.

10/28/2007 1:11:27 AM

Pretty sure they went to flight school in Florida too.

10/28/2007 7:51:17 AM

Quote :

"It doesn't sound like that at all, you're just being an idiot. The hijackers were already pilots that could fly proficiently enough to be commercially licensed (which requires upwards of 250 hours of flying time). After familiarizing themselves with the operation of an aircraft then there is no reason why they wouldn't be able to crash it into a building."

no, you are being a fucking idiot. In order to successfully crash into the WTC they would have had to line up for an approach from miles out...its not a matter of circling over Manhattan until you see the fucking thing and then dive bomb into it. And hand held GPS devices are not accurate enough to be able to accomplish this. Sure it will get you to Manhattan but it won't line you up for a landing on broadway.

10/28/2007 11:27:27 AM

last i heard, most (ummm.... all) commercial airliners have navigation capabilities built in, which you could presumably use if you had been trained on the cockpit.

do you just find it so hard to believe that anybody except the US government couple round up 4 people who knew how to navigate and fly/crash a plane? There are probably millions of trained and licensed pilots in the US, and even more elsewhere. What's so hard to believe that a few of them are suicidal Islamic nutjobs?

if this was out of the realm of possibility, don't you think we would hear an outcry among real pilots saying "hey, wait a minute, this is impossible. it would take me years to learn how to fly into the biggest building in the country"

[Edited on October 28, 2007 at 11:37 AM. Reason : .]

10/28/2007 11:35:45 AM

Airliners line up for landing from miles out because that is what an IFR approach looks like. They are required to do this and it has nothing to do with the maneuverability of the aircraft.

No one ever said that GPS lines you up for anything. It just tells you exactly where something is, which is helpful if you plan on crashing a plane into it. Even the hand held units available in 2001 were capable of this. The Garmin GPS III Pilot used by Mohamed Atta was accurate to within 50 feet.

Are you actually saying that it was hard to find the WTC from the air? I don't know if you've seen pictures of it, but it was actually the most prominent part of the Manhattan sky line.

10/28/2007 3:25:29 PM

you both missed the point again...

the point is they had help. Its not as simple as you two Bush fans think.

10/28/2007 4:21:17 PM

^ quit bringing Bush into this. I voted against that joker twice, and I'll be first in line to kick his ass to the curb if impeachment papers are ever drawn up. I think his group of Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Ashcroft/Gonzales are some of the most corrupt, despicable politicians ever to walk through Washington DC.

having said that, i just don't buy that they would knowingly play a significant role in an event like this, even if the supposed motives did make sense (they doesn't). furthermore, given his total incompetency at doing anything more complicated than signing his name on executive orders, i don't think he could pull off a stunt like this and keep it quiet for 7 years.


[Edited on October 28, 2007 at 4:27 PM. Reason : .]

10/28/2007 4:27:06 PM

bush is the president, is he not? then he takes the blame for fuck ups like this. He should be brought into everything...

[Edited on October 28, 2007 at 4:30 PM. Reason : .]

10/28/2007 4:29:51 PM

You've yet to make a single valid point. They didn't need help.

I'm not a Bush fan at all, I'm just an opponent of stupidity. You fail.

10/28/2007 4:33:13 PM

You've yet to make a valid point. You're a sheep.

Government says there was no help and it was all Osama bin Laden's doing...general public, you included, accepts this with embracing arms.

10/28/2007 4:36:02 PM

Quote :

"bush is the president, is he not? then he takes the blame for fuck ups like this. He should be brought into everything..."

oh, i get it now.
If you're a Republican/Conservative and/or Bush supporter, if you refuse to believe the conspiracy theories, it's because you're protecting Bush.

But if you're a Liberal Bush-hater, you automatically have to assume Bush was involved because he's evil and everything that goes wrong in this country is his fault.

.... nice to see you have your bases covered.

10/28/2007 4:36:10 PM

wtf are you talking about? I said they had help. I didn't say bush called Bin Laden on the hot line and hatched this plan. You cannot deny they had help from some where. You don't go from vans with explosives in the basement to planning 9/11 successfully without some kind of outside help.

but regardless...these attacks were extremely convenient for this administration. Not to mention bush washes the American blood spilt off his hands with Arab oil.

10/28/2007 4:42:06 PM

Instead of defending your previous statements you're just going to abandon them and call me a sheep for not being contrary to everything that I see on the news. How original.

If it's so obvious that there was help then prove it.

10/28/2007 4:50:57 PM

every time someone proves anything, you are all in denial and toss the source aside as conspiracy or an idiot. I have better things to do with my time than care what you think. The day I start putting effort in my postings on TWW is the day I start rethinking my life. I have nothing to prove to you. You say A and I say B. I could careless about making you chose B also.

10/28/2007 4:56:55 PM

Quote :

"You don't go from vans with explosives in the basement to planning 9/11 successfully without some kind of outside help."

no, i think you can. Like i've said several times before, I think people/the press/everyone are giving Al Qaeda way too much credit for being evil masterminds. I honestly don't think pulling off 9/11 requires a genius. Yes - it took a lot of planning, time, money, due diligence, and perhaps a good bit of luck (the least of which was that all 4 planes actually departed close to their planned time - something that you couldn't count on just 6 years later). But nothing that happened on that day is out of the realm of possibility for a group of well-funded, methodical ideologues.

and given that, i certainly don't live in fear of any of them, or cower at the thought of them planning something else, like you have previously implied. The Administration has certainly done them a favor, though, by making American's think that terrorists are plotting and are capable of killing every one of us, whenever they please.

10/28/2007 5:06:02 PM

Actually I'm the only one who uses facts. You're the one who states a hypothesis and then spouts ignorance in the hopes that it proves something. Here's a challenge: point out one example of someone proving something and then me denying it.

Otherwise that was an excellent cop out. I hope that you have equal success in the future whenever you abandon an indefensible position.

10/28/2007 5:06:42 PM

Quote :

"quit bringing Bush into this. I voted against that joker twice, and I'll be first in line to kick his ass to the curb if impeachment papers are ever drawn up. I think his group of Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Ashcroft/Gonzales are some of the most corrupt, despicable politicians ever to walk through Washington DC. having said that, i just don't buy that they would knowingly play a significant role in an event like this, even if the supposed motives did make sense (they don't). furthermore, given his total incompetency at doing anything more complicated than signing his name on executive orders, i don't think he could pull off a stunt like this and keep it quiet for 7 years."

signed.

couldn't have said it better myself.

BushCo. exploited national anger and outrage at 9/11 attacks to use as a pretext to invade a sovereign nation that had ZERO to do with the attacks... that in itself is far more criminal than anything any other president has done.

but it doesnt make him culpable as the architect of the attacks or even having allowed the attacks to take place.

10/28/2007 5:17:54 PM

http://allday.com/post/4801-ex-cia-pilot-gives-sworn-testimony-that-no-planes-ever-hit-the-twin-towers/

ALSO WHERE'S MY FUCKING MONEY

7/13/2015 3:45:09 PM

that's a real in-depth article there.

also LOL that he says an engine should be in tact after a plane traveling a few hundred miles an hour flies into a skyscraper.

7/13/2015 4:48:50 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zsi6J0SD3QI

7/13/2015 6:34:21 PM