Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Darklord Hacker group is threatening to unleash 9/11 documents

Options
1234689

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Ahmed, the paymaster for the hijackers, was actually in Washington on 9/11, and had a series of pre-9/11 top-level meetings in the White House, the Pentagon, the national security council, and with George Tenet, then head of the CIA, and Marc Grossman, the under-secretary of state for political affairs. When Ahmed was exposed by the Wall Street Journal as having sent the money to the hijackers


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,702 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Never said they never existed. I said in posts before this, Pakistan ISI and Saudi royals financed this operation. Read the links in the first dump the Saudis were mentioned in the file dump.

    The video not out yet, but I know is about General Mahmoud Ahmed, and him sending money to the hijackers.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/22/usa.september11

    Yet another whacky source, poorly researched. No surprise there.

    Michael Meacher. Completely debunked here. In the same newspaper.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/sep/09/september11.usa


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    The Nal wrote: »
    Jason Bermas? FFS. This is one of the clowns who made Loose Change.

    The documents are real. Homeland security chased them across the internet and started shutting down their accounts. They even shut down a site they owned on dark web.

    By the way, the hijackers James Woods identified on flight 11 in August 2001 was https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_al-Mihdhar ( hijacker of flight 77) CIA knew who this guy was in 2000 and did not tell the FBI he arrived in the United States to carry out an attack. The other guy is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamza_al-Ghamdi (hijacker on flight 175)

    The other two are not 9/11 hijackers. So we have evidence now the FBI list of 19 hijackers is wrong or these guys got away and were never got caught.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,306 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The documents are real. Homeland security chased them across the internet and started shutting down their accounts. They even shut down a site they owned on dark web.

    Please, please tell me you aren’t referring to that obvious-photoshop-is-obvious that allegedly shows the government shut down their websites.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,884 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Pakistan ISI and Saudi royals financed this operation

    Added Pakistani ISI to the list of those involved in your 911 theory

    It's now:
    Larry Silverstein
    His insurers
    Saudi Princes and officials
    Bush
    Rumsfeld
    Cheney
    NORAD
    CIA Mujahideen
    NIST investigators
    Mossad (possibly)
    US military (unspecified generals)
    Various unspecified businessmen
    Pakistani ISI


    Is that correct

    How about Pentagon officials who are potentially withholding surveillance tapes?

    Pentagon witnesses?

    Air traffic controllers who strongly support the official government line?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,702 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Dohnjoe wrote: »

    Pentagon witnesses?

    Hundreds of random Washington civilians who would've seen the plane miss the Pentagon and fly away but kept quiet about it.

    Also the people who went around knocking the lampposts down.Whatever they're called. Lamppost fellers maybe.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,306 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    The Nal wrote: »
    Hundreds of random Washington civilians who would've seen the plane miss the Pentagon and fly away but kept quiet about it.

    Also the people who went around knocking the lampposts down.Whatever they're called. Lamppost fellers maybe.

    Lam’posters? Lamp Imposters


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,657 ✭✭✭storker


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Added Pakistani ISI to the list of those involved in your 911 theory

    It's now:
    Larry Silverstein
    His insurers
    Saudi Princes and officials
    Bush
    Rumsfeld
    Cheney
    NORAD
    CIA Mujahideen
    NIST investigators
    Mossad (possibly)
    US military (unspecified generals)
    Various unspecified businessmen
    Pakistani ISI


    Is that correct

    How about Pentagon officials who are potentially withholding surveillance tapes?

    Pentagon witnesses?

    Air traffic controllers who strongly support the official government line?

    You forgot the dancing Jews, or are they included under Mossad?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,884 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    storker wrote: »
    You forgot the dancing Jews, or are they included under Mossad?

    Under Mossad.

    Latest entry is ex vice-President Biden because someone mistyped "Bin Laden" on a conspiracy blog, which automatically makes him an integral and key suspect now with compelling evidence linking him to the entire inside job


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    storker wrote: »
    You forgot the dancing Jews, or are they included under Mossad?

    Least two of the men were identified as agents of Mossad. The confusion is when did they start filming the attacks on 9/11?

    Reports vary- before the first plane hit some people have claimed. Others have said just after the first plane hit the tower.

    There not a whole lot of evidence to blame this attack on the Israel.

    My position is was a neocon plot ( they have links to Israel) still this does not constitute evidence, the leaders in Israel were notified about it.

    Hijackers themselves were managed by Saudi Arabia royals and officials and also managed by rogue intelligence officers in the Pakistani ISI. The money trail traces back to these guys not bin laden. CIA for a long time paid and trained foreign fighters from Islamic countries to head to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets ( the foreign fighters were called the mujahideen)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,505 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Least two of the men were identified as agents of Mossad. The confusion is when did they start filming the attacks on 9/11?

    Reports vary- before the first plane hit some people have claimed. Others have said just after the first plane hit the tower.

    There not a whole lot of evidence to blame this attack on the Israel.

    My position is was a neocon plot ( they have links to Israel) still this does not constitute evidence, the leaders in Israel were notified about it.

    Hijackers themselves were managed by Saudi Arabia royals and officials and also managed by rogue intelligence officers in the Pakistani ISI. The money trail traces back to these guys not bin laden. CIA for a long time paid and trained foreign fighters from Islamic countries to head to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets ( the foreign fighters were called the mujahideen)

    Honestly, you can't even get the basics right so why would anyonr believe yoi when it comes to complex/technical things?


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Honestly, you can't even get the basics right so why would anyonr believe yoi when it comes to complex/technical things?


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen

    Afghans and foreign fighters fought the war. They were thrown in together as if they are the same. When the Soviets left, you saw the two groups split and fight each other.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,505 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Afghans and foreign fighters fought the war. They were thrown in together as if they are the same. When the Soviets left, you saw the two groups split and fight each other.

    Yes i know


    This is the part you are wrong about
    ( the foreign fighters were called the mujahideen)


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,884 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe



    Hijackers themselves were managed by Saudi Arabia royals and officials and also managed by rogue intelligence officers in the Pakistani ISI. The money trail traces back to these guys not bin laden. CIA for a long time paid and trained foreign fighters from Islamic countries to head to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets ( the foreign fighters were called the mujahideen)

    Which hijackers, you claimed men were funded by the CIA, Saudis and the Pakistanis but you also claimed they weren't the ones who carried out the attack

    Who did carry out the attacks according to you? why did they do it?

    It's a pretty gaping hole in your story


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Which hijackers, you claimed men were funded by the CIA, Saudis and the Pakistanis but you also claimed they weren't the ones who carried out the attack

    Who did carry out the attacks according to you? why did they do it?

    It's a pretty gaping hole in your story

    I said we have not got any video of 12 hijackers boarding the planes on 9/11.

    In 17 years we only got two videos of the hijackers on 9/11. One video released shown middle eastern men at (Dulles airport in Boston) this video has no timestamp or date. And the other one from a smaller airport in Maine ( The Mohammed Atta video) has a timestamp and date.

    Where the security footage showing the other 12 Hijackers. Cameras are everywhere in airports, bars restaurants, check-in areas and parking lots. There must be security footage of the other 12 men and why have not they released it to the public? Obviously, the planes were hijacked but some of the men involved have never been seen on video.

    Not a gaping hole at all, it only debunkers think like this. You expect truthers to know every detail of what took place this is ridiculous and not rational at all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,702 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Some detail for a theory would be good though. You provide none. You dont have a theory. Youre the best reason to believe the official explanation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,306 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Not a gaping hole at all, it only debunkers think like this. You expect truthers to know every detail of what took place this is ridiculous and not rational at all.

    Yet it’s truthers obsessed with the fidelity of an FEA simulation over a decade old and with how quickly/slowly 18 stories of a 47 story building fell. Even though if you fell out of a tree you would experience several stages of free fall speed interspersed with hitting branches on your way down.

    It’s not even a question of every detail just basic details like where any evidence at all exists of controlled demolition, much less a substantial theory about who the perpetrators were, what the goal was and how that same goal could not have been achieved by simply crashing planes into buildings and letting events take their natural course afterward.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,884 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    I said we have not got any video of 12 hijackers boarding the planes on 9/11.

    This is what you claimed:
    I always said the hijackers were funded by Saudi officials and Pakistan ISI and CIA was involved or at very least allowed this attack to happen. The terrorists did not knock down the buildings if they did then this is being covered up. I doubt it was them.

    Al Qeada was used you think they had the funding and logistics to pull this off. This was a state-sponsored false flag attack. The hijackers are mostly patsies some of them may have been unaware of the bigger plot.

    There were two groups of hijackers?

    Then who actually carried out the attacks on 911? and why did they do it? (if they are patsies?)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    The Nal wrote: »
    Some detail for a theory would be good though. You provide none. You dont have a theory. Youre the best reason to believe the official explanation.

    If you say so. Where your evidence? You have some pictures online to look at what else?

    Do you know the 19 hijackers, did you meet them? Give me a full rundown of their lives before 9/11 and include everyone they met in the years before they carried out the attack. Who they met in America and had conversations with. No Waffle just clear and concise history based on your understanding of the events.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,306 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    If you say so. Where your evidence? You have some pictures online to look at what else?

    Do you know the 19 hijackers, did you meet them? Give me a full rundown of their lives before 9/11 and include everyone they met in the years before they carried out the attack. Who they met in America and had conversations with. No Waffle just clear and concise history based on your understanding of the events.

    Seems like that would be your burden of proof. I’m not even sure why you need to know all that.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    If you say so. Where your evidence? You have some pictures online to look at what else?

    Do you know the 19 hijackers, did you meet them? Give me a full rundown of their lives before 9/11 and include everyone they met in the years before they carried out the attack. Who they met in America and had conversations with. No Waffle just clear and concise history based on your understanding of the events.
    Cheerful, that's not what you are being asked. You are being asked to detail out your version of events beyond that you just don't accept the real version of events.
    You however seem to be unable to do that. You seem to equate presenting a concise summary of an alternate theory with the questions above.
    This indicates that you have no sane rational alternate theory at all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,761 ✭✭✭Donnielighto


    If you say so. Where your evidence? You have some pictures online to look at what else?

    Do you know the 19 hijackers, did you meet them? Give me a full rundown of their lives before 9/11 and include everyone they met in the years before they carried out the attack. Who they met in America and had conversations with. No Waffle just clear and concise history based on your understanding of the events.

    In fiarness he didnt say that. You are finding what appear to be gaos to toy and just filling them with conjecture that suits.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    This is what you claimed:



    There were two groups of hijackers?

    Then who actually carried out the attacks on 911? and why did they do it? (if they are patsies?)

    Pretty obvious why you need patsies. The buildings came down by controlled demolition. Look strange if they just collapsed on their own and there no terrorists :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,667 ✭✭✭✭banie01


    If you say so. Where your evidence? You have some pictures online to look at what else?

    Do you know the 19 hijackers, did you meet them? Give me a full rundown of their lives before 9/11 and include everyone they met in the years before they carried out the attack. Who they met in America and had conversations with. No Waffle just clear and concise history based on your understanding of the events.

    Would those not be the details that you need to present to prove "your conspiracy"?

    Are you again confused as to how to proving an assertion works?
    1. If you make a claim, you are expected to lay out supporting evidence
    2. The absence of evidence is not proof of anything.

    Every thread you are involved in descends to you repeatedly asking for proof.
    Again as has been explained in your other dumpster fires.
    You are presenting "theories" better described as veiled racism/sectarian blood libels with absolutely zero proof.
    When pressed for proof, you present nothing of evidentiary value.

    This is your chance to present a plausible theory and lay out the supporting evidence.

    Can you do that?


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Pretty obvious why you need patsies. The buildings came down by controlled demolition. Look strange if they just collapsed on their own and there no terrorists :)
    So if they were patsies and were on the plane, why do you believe there is no video footage of them?


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,306 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    That relies on there being evidence of a controlled demolition, of which there is none; only personal incredulity that fires, debris, quakes and airplanes were able to bring three (really 4) buildings to their breaking point, based on a fixation with the NIST FEA and a failure to understand basic kinematics.

    But this thread isn’t really about getting hijacked as another 3,000 post dumpster fire, and is more about this alleged release of files by the hacker group that is doling them out like a Dianetics convention


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    Seems like that would be your burden of proof. I’m not even sure why you need to know all that.

    You guys are accepting the official story and not worrying about the backstory and how they ended up doing the attacks in first place. In the 28 pages, classified section of the 9/11 commission report we got a lot of information about Saudi Royals and Diplomats meeting them on a regular basis at restaurants and at Mosques and Saudi money was transferred to a Saudi spy and he passed this money onto the hijackers so they could buy cars and rent apartments. Look into the background of some of the flight's schools you find they are partly owned by Saudi Arabia. One of the schools the owner was a former CIA agent ( who had connections to the Iran- Contra affair and drug smuggling) There plenty of evidence available to notice the official narrative is fake. Bush went out of his way to stop the investigation of 9/11 it only the 9/11 families resolve that got them to do a limited whitewash investigation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 82,306 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    What does what you’re referring to have to do with the Darklord group? They hacked insurance files, right, reportedly 10 gigabytes of insurance documents. What is going to possibly be in the insurance documents that would support the theory that the attacks were an inside job?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,893 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring


    Overheal wrote: »
    That relies on there being evidence of a controlled demolition, of which there is none; only personal incredulity that fires, debris, quakes and airplanes were able to bring three (really 4) buildings to their breaking point, based on a fixation with the NIST FEA and a failure to understand basic kinematics.

    But this thread isn’t really about getting hijacked as another 3,000 post dumpster fire, and is more about this alleged release of files by the hacker group that is doling them out like a Dianetics convention

    Not a true at all. NIST hadn't got the time to fix and change their computer simulation of progressive collapse and you can see clearly the errors are still there in their model and have not been fixed even after the updated revision. Kingmob does not understand this. If you look at their model the Northwest wall the column supports and floors are still there supporting in stage 2 of collapse. They did a sleight of hand and just wrote a bunch of words claiming freefall was consistent with our earlier findings.

    The slow buckling failures from east to west were pulling in the walls and crushing the structure and walls when it fell. NIST theory about the collapse is junk even their own model does not support it. Never mind we know they modelled the failure without the proper connections and they wanted it to fail.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,505 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Not a true at all. NIST hadn't got the time to fix and change their computer simulation of progressive collapse and you can see clearly the errors are still there in their model and have not been fixed even after the updated revision. Kingmob does not understand this. If you look at their model the Northwest wall the column supports and floors are still there supporting in stage 2 of collapse. They did a sleight of hand and just wrote a bunch of words claiming freefall was consistent with our earlier findings.

    The slow buckling failures from east to west were pulling in the walls and crushing the structure and walls when it fell. NIST theory about the collapse is junk even their own model does not support it. Never mind we know they modelled the failure without the proper connections and they wanted it to fail.

    What does this have to do with this thread? You're just repeating the same sh/te you havr spammed the other thread wuth for the last few months. How about discussing the topic of this thread?


Advertisement