Skeptic Project

I would like to hear your explanation for 2 odd things, surrounding 9/11, that are suspicious in my opinion. Regardless of all other evidence or lack there of. I will not ask you to refute some facts (because these are facts that cannot be refuted), but instead, want to see you debunkers 'rationalize' these things away.

1) How is it that for EVERY single mass-death or even events of few casualties, in the US, the media is flooded with interviews, biograpies, stories, books etc. of the people left behind. Whether you look at the people left behind the casualties in the WTC buildings itsself, whether it's people left behind in the Oklahoma disaster, family left behind from soldiers' deaths, always you will hear their stories everywhere in the media. Why is the soo little, if not NO, word of people left behind the flight passengers of the alledged hijacked plains? In fact, in some cases where we do know the people involved, they simply are silent and don't want to talk.

Read:
http://www.rense.com/general68/doomed.htm (and don't come back debunking some loose claims in the story, just want to have an explanation for my case above)

2) Why is it that the people that did die as passengers of the flight, somehow boarded in suspicious circumstances? This is not the oddest. The odd thing is, that spread across all those flights, there were several high placed employees of 1 company: http://www.raytheon.com/

The business of the company makes it a little bit odd, that several employees, were in several of the 9/11 flights. Don't you think so? Isn't that a bit too much coincedence?

3) Last thing I would like to hear an explanation of: Why would GW Bush not testify under oath AND not alone (he needed company of Dick Cheney somehow).

You accept the explanation uttered here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9AoaU7LlTk#!


Please let me know your views on the 3 mentioned things.

Quote from Damarauder

I would like to hear your explanation for 2 odd things, surrounding 9/11, that are suspicious in my opinion. Regardless of all other evidence or lack there of. I will not ask you to refute some facts (because these are facts that cannot be refuted), but instead, want to see you debunkers 'rationalize' these things away.

1) How is it that for EVERY single mass-death or even events of few casualties, in the US, the media is flooded with interviews, biograpies, stories, books etc. of the people left behind. Whether you look at the people left behind the casualties in the WTC buildings itsself, whether it's people left behind in the Oklahoma disaster, family left behind from soldiers' deaths, always you will hear their stories everywhere in the media. Why is the soo little, if not NO, word of people left behind the flight passengers of the alledged hijacked plains? In fact, in some cases where we do know the people involved, they simply are silent and don't want to talk.

Read:
http://www.rense.com/general68/doomed.htm (and don't come back debunking some loose claims in the story, just want to have an explanation for my case above)

Yeah.. on principle I'm not going to read a rense.com article (see bottom of post). There were plenty of stories covered of people on the flights, I can't remember any off hand (I don't remember ones of the people in the buildings either), but I do know one involved a young black teenager. Plus all of the stories of the people who talked to loved ones from the planes or to authorities/air traffic control. Not to mention they made two movies about people on the planes at least. So yeah, totally ignored!

But even so, what does it imply if stories were covered? It seems to me the reason the ones in the buildings were covered more often is because there were 1) far more people in the buildings, nearly 10:1 ratio 2) they weren't killed instantly and thus had to try to survive adding heroic parts to their lives. 3) the media responds to what people want, if people wanted stories about nobodies killed instantly on airplanes, then every plane crash would have long documentaries about each victim, but instead they enjoy stories of people being heroes, rescuing others, running through burning buildings, etc be it on 9/11 or the Oklahoma City Bombing, etc. It's insensitive to say, but yeah, Flight 19 had an interesting story, but over all most of the action was on the ground in NYC.

Plus also aside from the movies there were tons of history channel, national geographic, etc documentaries made about the planes themselves, aside from Flight 19, and some of the people on them.

Quote from Damarauder

2) Why is it that the people that did die as passengers of the flight, somehow boarded in suspicious circumstances? This is not the oddest. The odd thing is, that spread across all those flights, there were several high placed employees of 1 company: http://www.raytheon.com/ .

Define "suspicious circumstances." They moon walked onto the air plane, appeared magically on the air plane after it had taken off, or did they take a flight from Boston/New York like millions of people do? Holy shit that's suspcious!

Quote from Damarauder

The business of the company makes it a little bit odd, that several employees, were in several of the 9/11 flights. Don't you think so? Isn't that a bit too much coincedence?

No, I don't think so. The children's entertainment group The Wiggles fly on different planes all the time in case something happens, they must be involved in 9/11 as well. It's also not surprising that because Raytheon makes plane-related things that employees would fly on regular airlines, do you think that Raytheon has some powerful dedicated fleet of planes for employees?

Up until 9/11 even Bill Gates, Steve Balmer, Paul Allen, and other Microsoft execs, some of the richest people in the world, flew coach on regular airlines, must be involved in 9/11 too! It's likely that Raytheon had and still does have a deal with major airlines for their employees to fly reduced or free, this is more cost effective than having a bunch of private planes. Raytheon is a company, it's goal is to make money, why would they waste it? Also I feel the need to bring up: they were on different planes, so what? You do realize that the planes were going to different places, right? Why would they all be on the same plane if one is going to LA and another to some place else? If there was a deal between Raytheon and the airlines (completely logical there is) then it's likely they could only get seats where they were left over as well, so they might get split up if they were going to the same place.

Again what's being implied here? Raytheon wanted to knock off some employees so they broadened the amount of people involved in 9/11 more so they put them on the planes? These questions are so bizarre and asinine they're almost impossible to answer.

Basically asking the questions you did only brings up more questions as to why what you asked isn't completely stupid.

All of this stuff only proves more so that 9/11 wasn't an inside job, because it only further expands the base of how many thousands of people were involved, and secrets that big don't stay secret for very long. And you can't cite the Manhattan Project, because both the USSR and Germany knew about it, it wasn't the same kind of "secret."

Quote from Damarauder

3) Last thing I would like to hear an explanation of: Why would GW Bush not testify under oath AND not alone (he needed company of Dick Cheney somehow).

You accept the explanation uttered here? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9AoaU7LlTk#!

Please let me know your views on the 3 mentioned things.

The reason for this is actually answered on this site some place, but actually it had to do with the fact if he testified under oath, he'd be obligated to give away top secret information.

There are always odd things with any major event with 9/11, but that never implies that automatically there is some sort of conspiracy going on, it doesn't even lend to that: http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/articles/911/what-do-we-know/ (it's several pages long, I suggest reading it; page navigation at the very bottom)

More about why I won't go to rense.com:

Not much about him here: http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/articles/jeff-rense/
But check out some other insanely crazy shit he's promoted: http://politics.skepticproject.com/articles/obama/obamas-policies/#soviet_muppets

Jeff Rense is a screaming anti-semite who lies constantly, just read the articles on his web site, they, like the one above, include so many far-fetched insane, contradicting things why in the hell should I even consider anything he's written? Or maybe I'm a "secret Jew" like he'd say for thinking he's wrong.

this place is kinda quiet lately but seriously guys, answering a 9/11 truther? i find it suspicious that he has not been locked up in guantanamo (by muertos, naturally) for asking these highly provocative questions.

and when i write highly provocative i mean childish and idiotic.

Or maybe I'm a "secret Jew"

Most certainly.

What does he call "normal" jews? Openly jewish?

My question was not to rate the rense.com site. I simply put the link there because the link explains why it is strange so little survivors of the plane victims have been in the media. 4 passenger jets, yet you try to debunk my theory by mentioning 1 or 2 survivors that have been in the media. Could/should have been at least 50+ if you relate these victims to other plane crash victims or disaster victims in general. But ok, you have a point when you say the ratio of plane victims is low compared to victims inside the WTC.

Second bullet, ok, could be a coincedence. Just thought it was kindof remarkable to have people from the same company in multiple of those flights. I agree, it does not proof or necessarily even mean anything.

Third. Well, sorry, but if you guys seriously feel Bush had valid reasons for not testifying under oath (and only with someone holding his hand), because he'd be obliged to talk about classified information... you've lost all connections with reality. Why the HELL would government secrets be relevant in a hearing on 9/11? If they were, doesn't that imply involvement? Seriously, if anyone else would NOT want to testify under oath, take a poligraph or uses his right to remain silent, even you guys would be immediately suspicious... but nooo, not with your dear president. Who is a proven liar (may I remind you of the WMD in Iraq?) and his accomplises earning money (Halliburton) by selling nuclear material to Iran, through proxy companies. If you swallow this kind of bullshit from your elected representative, you're really beyond rescue.

Quote from Damarauder

My question was not to rate the rense.com site. I simply put the link there because the link explains why it is strange so little survivors of the plane victims have been in the media. 4 passenger jets, yet you try to debunk my theory by mentioning 1 or 2 survivors that have been in the media. Could/should have been at least 50+ if you relate these victims to other plane crash victims or disaster victims in general.

so what really bothers you is that people have lives and choose not to be in the media, choose not to believe in idiotic conspiracy theory that their government uses planes for cityscaping?

Bush ruined his party's brand and the brand of neoconservative ideology with Iraq war. No profit.

Almost every single contract for oil post-war has gone to non-American corporations. No profit.

The government contractors who *thought* they were going to get a sweet gig in Iraq have been ran over with a fine toothed comb by the media. Good luck with smokey backroom deals done in secret now. Definitely no profit.

Iraq was not invaded for profit, it was invaded for ideology. Opportunistic profiteers tried to profit off of Iraq, this is true. But they mostly failed.

Your problem is that you attribute malice to simple incompetence.

In reply to Agent Matt:

Yes, foreign companies also got a huge piece of the pie, but specifically Blackwater and Halliburton (owned by you know who) and corporations like Lockheed Martin, SAIC and other military companies made heavy profits from the war itsself (just look at the 2011 annual report of Lockheed Martin and you will see what I mean). We can have huge debates over this, but please be realistic, the companies mentioned have definitely profited of the Iraq war and most other US wars as well. And frankly, US budget is well served with war spending.

Added to this the PNAC plans, and the very clear intention (prior to 9/11) of the US administration (read: Bush/neocon) to invade Iraq and you have a profit-profit situation for both corporations and government.

In reply to Elvis:
I see a 'conspiracy' (although I prefer the word cover-up) especially in the way the Pentagon was struck (hence my suspicion when I comes to the lack of plane-crash-victim survivors: I do not believe the Pentagon was struck by an airplane). I do believe, like most of you here, that it were simple muslim extremists conspired to and then flew into the WTC. But my twist to this (and this is at least suggested by a lot of circumstancial evidence), is that some people had sufficient knowledge of this upcoming event (even perhaps without knowing too much specifics), to manipulate/use the event to profit of it. For the rest of it: I agree with all of you that it would be insanely unlikely that anyone in the US government would deliberately orchestrate anything like this. Manipulation however, is something that has been proven in the past and I would not be surprised if it happened this time.

Fucking hell we let a conspiritard in ? someone kick him already.

Damarauder
You are prpeating the same crape that has been around for 10 years. Speakingas a former twoofer 9/11 is a outside job. Case Cosed. Now go back to Infowars or Above Top Secret dote com and stop forceing your realigon on the resrt of us.

Quote from Damarauder

You got me wrong. I believe 9/11 was an outside job as well

riiiight, yet you see a conspiracy in there somewhere because of lack of media time for families of the plane crash victims.

Got another anti-semite for you guys. Ray mc Govern, a nazi, racist, anti-semite fuck. He must be wrong!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWSBVBD2ZM8

Quote from anticultist

@Damarauder:

You need to realise that since your previous racist video posts and your defense of known racists, no one here is going to check out any link you post again or take anything you say seriously.

If you want any interaction with folks here that doesn't involve you being ridiculed and verbally slaughtered you should probably quit posting your fucking shit links.

You had an opportunity to be taken seriously when allowed here and you pretty much fucked it up. Members here know that people who claim to be fence sitters are typically closet conspiracy theorists, you have presented that about yourself already.

May I suggest something you might not be familiar with, try googling it. "Education"

education, he says. yet all he posted was crap and his own half baked nonsense. i am glad i had none of that what he considers education. at least zeitards have enough common sense to leave when they're being ridiculed.

Quote from JimJesus

The USS Liberty conspiracy is so stupid. Yea, the Isreali government offered a formal apology, worked with US investigators and offered over 12 million (in 1960 money) in compensation. 6 to the US government and 6 to the victims and their families.... but they did it on purpose? o_O

HERP DERP, WE'RE GONNA STICK IT TO THOS AMERIKKKKANS BY SHOOTING THEIR SHIP, SAYING WE'RE SORRY AND GIVE THEM A BOAT LOAD OF OUR MONEY BECAUSE WE'RE JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS!

Shit doesn't make any fucking sense.

I guess education will not help here. Perhaps an alarmclock to wake you the hell up? The fact the USS Liberty attack was done on purpose, Israel fully aware of what they were doing, is not even remotely controversial.