Pete Carroll is apparently a 9/11 truther

abandon hope wrote:

Jesse the body ventura wrote:

What that video is missing is a time stamp.

JFC

how are those angels and goblins messing up your life today, troofer?

The issue is not "angels and goblins" but MAGIC. 9/11 was a (high tech) magic trick! There were no planes, no hijackers (that is the reason nobody reported them!). It was all created using special effects and computers. It might have been a James Cameron production. Why didn't anyone involved report it? A few reasons: #1 They new they would never get work in Hollywood again. #2 They knew they would never get work in the government either. #3 Living under a bridge is NO FUN.

Why do you suppose it was reported on the television news in England that Building 7 had fallen -- 1/2 hour before it fell?

Jesse the body ventura wrote:

I think it is reasonable to be suspicious of that video, given that there are no indications at all of where or when the footage was taken.

But even so, supposing that the video is real, is it intellectually honest to commit to the idea that those guys took over an entire plane, and wrested control from pilots with combat experience, using BOX CUTTERS? I mean, it's hard to do damage to BOXES with boxes cutters, to say nothing of cowing an entire plane full of passengers into submission using them.

On this claim, like the others, I call bullshit.

"Utility knives up to four inches were permitted at the time by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as carry-on items."

"By 07:50, the five hijackers, carrying knives and box cutters, had made it through the airport security checkpoint."

"American Airlines was already aware of the hijacking. Between 09:16 and 09:26, passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, United States Solicitor General Theodore Olson, and reported that the airplane had been hijacked and that the assailants had box cutters and knives. She reported that the passengers, including the pilots, had been moved to the back of the cabin and that the hijackers were unaware of her call. A minute into the conversation, the call was cut off."

K5 wrote:

Why do you suppose it was reported on the television news in England that Building 7 had fallen -- 1/2 hour before it fell?

I've already explained that to you back on page 4 of this thread.

TAA wrote:

K5 wrote:

Why do you suppose it was reported on the television news in England that Building 7 had fallen -- 1/2 hour before it fell?

I've already explained that to you back on page 4 of this thread.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5608122&page=5

My bad. It was on page 5.

No, I'm not hung up on that. I'm hung up on the entire situation. No fighters were scrambled... no surface to air defense... no military high alert in Washington DC. This happened an hour after the 2nd plane hit. THAT is what I'm hung up on.

TAA wrote:

[quote]K5 wrote:

Why do you suppose it was reported on the television news in England that Building 7 had fallen -- 1/2 hour before it fell?

I've already explained that to you back on page 4 of this thread.

No you did not because there is only one explanation for this and that is the people in charge knew what is coming and you do not want to admit this

blindsheepdays wrote:

Nice to see the smartest football coach on the planet knows something shady went down on 911. Sadly most of the clowns in the Stands believe everything their govmint and the TV commercials tell them.

Hey, nice use of the 'word', govmint! That really makes your argument so much more convincing!

Now, if only you had remembered to include 'libtard' somewhere in your post its veracity would have been unassailable.

I see.

Several NY Firefighters knew it was going to fall (odd that nobody knew the two Towers were going to fall)and passed this info onto the BBC somehow.

And the BBC accidentally jumped the gun.

That's the story?

K5 wrote:

I see.

Several NY Firefighters knew it was going to fall (odd that nobody knew the two Towers were going to fall)and passed this info onto the BBC somehow.

And the BBC accidentally jumped the gun.

That's the story?

perhaps you should read the comments. Most folks aren't buying this BS.

It is hard for me to buy that BBC knew this was going down, but then again, as stated by some earlier -

-a building owner is super sketchy

-a building falls in sketchy fashion

-a plane flies over the most important city in the world performing maneuvers that don't happen in seconds, and after it is obvious we're being attacked

-and the secretary of state slips about the shooting down of a passenger airplane.

I would actually support the shooting down of the plane for security purposes, but they don't need to lie about it. I mean damn, there is a lot of suspicious activity going on here.

Man, did I win the internet with that last one?

Suck it!

I am a moran.

After the fact pile of BS attempting a cover-up.

Why was only building 7 reported to have fallen given several other building were closer to the WTC?

Let's put Silverstein under sodium pentathol and get to the bottom of this.

Also, why won't the tell us who made all the bets against the airlines in the week leading up to 911? They investigated and found out but won't tell us. I wonder why that is?

K5 wrote:

Let's put Silverstein under sodium pentathol and get to the bottom of this.

Also, why won't the tell us who made all the bets against the airlines in the week leading up to 911? They investigated and found out but won't tell us. I wonder why that is?

They won't tell us who made these trades, because that is one of the privileges of trading on an exchange. Unless they surpass 5% stock ownership in a specific company, then they have to file a 13D with the SEC with an explanation. 115,000 shares were purchased in conjunction with the puts on UAL.

It was investigated....9/11 commission said: -A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly,much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades...

About the Barbara Olsen story, which was foundational for the official account:

1. Making a call from an onboard phone would have been very difficult, given the fact the American Airlines 757 had their onboard phone systems removed in January 2001.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/AA757AMM.html

2. Also, The cell phone technology in 2001 would have made a continuous cell phone conversation impossible.

The calls were bogus.

My personal favorite is the story of Mark Bingham, who called his mother to say, "Hi, Mom, this is Mark Bingham." You know, just in case his mother had forgotten his last name.

Jesse the body ventura wrote:

About the Barbara Olsen story, which was foundational for the official account:

1. Making a call from an onboard phone would have been very difficult, given the fact the American Airlines 757 had their onboard phone systems removed in January 2001.

2. Also, The cell phone technology in 2001 would have made a continuous cell phone conversation impossible.

The calls were bogus.

My personal favorite is the story of Mark Bingham, who called his mother to say, "Hi, Mom, this is Mark Bingham." You know, just in case his mother had forgotten his last name.

Oh, good. You should probably let all the families know that the calls were bogus. They'll appreciate it. Let us know how it goes.

Ha....better yet, Make a Youtube video for loose change and post it for foundational reasons.

PS...Mark Bingham's mother had a different last name.