9-11: Who did it?[W:1493]

[Mark F]

Ok. Let's hear the 12-15 "distinct" variations.

I happen to know that you know about the police radio transcripts, the fbi documents, the news casts, the TV appearances..

But sure, go ahead and make your case, let's see how "distinct" the stories are... though I'm sure you will get to 1 realize that you made up the rest and change the subject.

Start by reading the link at post #1296

 

[zyzygy]

Start by reading the link at post #1296

Facts do not interest Bman.

 

[Mark F]

Facts do not interest Bman.

What amazes me is the number of times we have played this game where he thinks he knows the subject matter well but he doesn't and therefore thinks he is going to trap me in some sort of gotcha moment, only to have the tables turned.

One would think after enough fails,...

 

[Fledermaus]

What amazes me is the number of times we have played this game where he thinks he knows the subject matter well but he doesn't and therefore thinks he is going to trap me in some sort of gotcha moment, only to have the tables turned.

One would think after enough fails,...

I'm amazed he hasn't figured out his posts stay on the web for over a year.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Start by reading the link at post #1296

Aside from the fact that you are using that long debunked "911myths" site... Whose credibility is less than the average blog.

And aside from the fact that this article relates to the van that was stopped, with denied explosives... Though they remained detained...that got conflated with the five Israelies (the actual topic).

Even if we combine the two unrelated stories, there are 3 newscasts quoted, 2 retractions, some blog quotes, etc... We still only have slight variations on 1 story... Not even the conservative side of your claim of a dozen.

So, we have a triple fail on your part.

Facts do not interest us debunkers.

Fixed that for you.

What amazes me is the number of times we have played this game where he thinks he knows the subject matter well but he doesn't and therefore thinks he is going to trap me in some sort of gotcha moment, only to have the tables turned.

One would think after enough fails,...

What amazes me is the number of times you get shown to push absolute lies and nonsense and still keep at it like the repetition will make it true.

 

[Fledermaus]

Aside from the fact that you are using that long debunked "911myths" site... Whose credibility is less than the average blog.

And aside from the fact that this article relates to the van that was stopped, with denied explosives... Though they remained detained...that got conflated with the five Israelies (the actual topic).

Even if we combine the two unrelated stories, there are 3 newscasts quoted, 2 retractions, some blog quotes, etc... We still only have slight variations on 1 story... Not even the conservative side of your claim of a dozen.

So, we have a triple fail on your part.

Fixed that for you.

What amazes me is the number of times you get shown to push absolute lies and nonsense and still keep at it like the repetition will make it true.

The only problem with the 9/11 Myths site is that it debunks so much of what you believe to be true.

 

[Mark F]

Aside from the fact that you are using that long debunked "911myths" site... Whose credibility is less than the average blog.

And aside from the fact that this article relates to the van that was stopped, with denied explosives... Though they remained detained...that got conflated with the five Israelies (the actual topic).

Even if we combine the two unrelated stories, there are 3 newscasts quoted, 2 retractions, some blog quotes, etc... We still only have slight variations on 1 story... Not even the conservative side of your claim of a dozen.

So, we have a triple fail on your part.


Fixed that for you.

What amazes me is the number of times you get shown to push absolute lies and nonsense and still keep at it like the repetition will make it true.

Yawn. Wake me if you ever get an actual rebuttal.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Yawn. Wake me if you ever get an actual rebuttal.

Lmao... Ok... I'll keep in mind your low standards of sourcing next time you ask.

 

[BmanMcfly]

9-11: Who did it?

The only problem with the 9/11 Myths site is that it debunks so much of what you believe to be true.

Lmao... Ya, all of none of it.

It reads like some 5th grader with Down syndrome wrote it...

Only a debunker could think that is a quality site.

 

[Fledermaus]

Lmao... Ya, all of none of it.

It reads like some 5th grader with Down syndrome wrote it...

Only a debunker could think that is a quality site.

And yet not one word about the ACCURACY of the site...

Sniveling about form while ignoring the function.

 

[Bob0627]

I figured you would not want to discuss controlled demolition with me or others.

Right, there's no point to it, if you mean by "others", like minded posters.

Your post pretty much sums up the state of threads regarding 9/11. Don't questions controlled demolition.

But that's not true, I do question the CDs. All aspects of it. I already made that quite clear: Who, what, why, where, when and how. That's 6 generic questions to start with, when I get some answers, there will be many more questions. That's how it works.

Don't question that there are many different alternative explanations.

I can't speak for others but your post was directed at me. Why would I question it? Why would anyone question it? When there is nothing legitimate from authority and authority covers up major portions, there will always be many different explanations from outside government. Are you that naive? What do you expect, automatons, sheep? Well there are a lot of those ....

Just accept it was CD, that there was no plane at Shankville, and Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon.

Your next question covers this one.

With that, each to their own views.

I agree 100%.

 

[Mark F]

Lmao... Ok... I'll keep in mind your low standards of sourcing next time you ask.

If the information in the link was so far off the mark you would have an actual rebuttal, not an ad hom.

 

[Bob0627]

Lmao... Ya, all of none of it.

It reads like some 5th grader with Down syndrome wrote it...

Only a debunker could think that is a quality site.

I especially like that most of the articles are written anonymously. See, unlike these people who are not anonymous:



Or these people:

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Or these:

Panel Members | Consensus 911

And those are just a few examples. Credibility is everything.

 

[Mark F]

I especially like that most of the articles are written anonymously. See, unlike these people who are not anonymous:



Or these people:

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Or these:

Panel Members | Consensus 911

And those are just a few examples. Credibility is everything.

When arguments from authority substitute for real science. Say, David Ray Griffin is an expert in what, exactly?

 

[BmanMcfly]

I especially like that most of the articles are written anonymously. See, unlike these people who are not anonymous:



Or these people:

Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

Or these:

Panel Members | Consensus 911

And those are just a few examples. Credibility is everything.

Ya, I know... And the worst part is that, if you were to read that entire site, you would find some pages with contradictory points, that are required in order to sustain the narrative.

Then, when people bring up the science, it's always "that doesn't apply", or some other hand waving attempt to disregard the facts.

I seriously wish that the debunkers were capable of proving the ct's wrong... But as is typical, more often than not, the conspiracy "theories" are just the prelude to conspiracy "fact"... But then it's made a case in the media, so debunkers accept it as fact, and worse, they then try to claim that the ct's are wrong because they were right.

 

[MisterLogical]

There are probably hundreds of threads on this. Let me start by saying that I am not a conspiracy theorist at all and never have been. However, there are many questions that have been left unanswered.

1. Flight 93 allegedly crashed in Shanksville, PA.
Q. Why were there no bodies or luggage at the "crash site"?
Q. Why was there no plane wreckage at the "crash site"?

2. An alleged plane hits the Pentagon.
Q. Why was there a near perfectly round hole in the outer wall with no wing sections or tail section on the ground?

Okay here is a major problem with trying to DISPROVE the original explanation. While people might find holes in the original case, there is just as many holes in the alternative explanations for what they believe actually happened that day.

A few questions no one can get down is

1.Where did the missing people of the plane go if not into the building
2.Where is the plane if it did not crash into the building
3.Where are the records of the plane crashing that day

We cant say that there is problems with the initial story and switch it with a story with just as many unanswered question. That just isnt logical. I actually did look into a lot of conspiracy theories and none of them can answer the many problems with the alternative stories.

 

[sKiTzo]

What is it? What is your 911 theory?

That all depends on which aspect of 911 you are talking about. You've been here long enough to know what all the theories are. A good portion of it is no longer theory. Over the years, hundreds if not thousands of single facts have been accumulated that tell a far different story than the one force-fed to Americans and requiring giant leaps of faith. In most cases, just one of those facts is enough to destroy the credibility of the OBSS.

Here's an example. One random fact about the whole fiasco: The whistleblower Michael Springmann, head US consular official in Jeddah in Saudi Arabia for 2 decades, was fired for refusing to issue visas to the hijackers. He was overridden by the CIA and State Dept. who then issued the visas. When Springmann went up the chain of command to expose what was going on, he was ignored and fired.

Forget the planes, the towers, the collapses, and the physics of it all. Just this one factoid all by itself is enough to conclude that we have a rogue, runaway train hell bent on destroying from within. .

 

[BmanMcfly]

That all depends on which aspect of 911 you are talking about. You've been here long enough to know what all the theories are. A good portion of it is no longer theory. Over the years, hundreds if not thousands of single facts have been accumulated that tell a far different story than the one force-fed to Americans and requiring giant leaps of faith. In most cases, just one of those facts is enough to destroy the credibility of the OBSS.

Here's an example. One random fact about the whole fiasco: The whistleblower Michael Springmann, head US consular official in Jeddah in Saudi Arabia for 2 decades, was fired for refusing to issue visas to the hijackers. He was overridden by the CIA and State Dept. who then issued the visas. When Springmann went up the chain of command to expose what was going on, he was ignored and fired.

Or the guy that escaped wtc7, said the building looked like people ran out in a hurry,; coffee with steam still coming off it, etc.. And tried to leave the towers, where the stairs were blown out in explosions, his story corroborated by video taken from ground level, seeing the guy screaming for help from a few floors up.

Well, he died a couple weeks later.

Forget the planes, the towers, the collapses, and the physics of it all. Just this one factoid all by itself is enough to conclude that we have a rogue, runaway train hell bent on destroying from within. .

yes, and they like to hide in plain sight.

But, you are completely correct, there's plenty that was going on that all tells a very different story.

This really was a multinational effort, I've detailed before, how do you build trust in a room full of criminals? You each commit a crime together, in this way you all know that you have those crimes over each other's heads. High level criminals don't like to directly get their hands dirty, and so, just leave enough of their "fingerprints" over the event so that each other knows they each played a role, and so through shared guilt, they are bonded.

Bush himself, probably didn't have much of a role until after the fact, and at best was told that "something would make him significant"... And so he golfed his way through to 9-11.

Cheney on the other hand, for a while he didn't even have a heart beat, and so was by some definitions walking dead. But he played a role in PNAC.

So, it's not really necessary to even go over the physics, however, if the collapse is shown to not have been consistent with what was witnessed, that would be a smoking gun.

But, yes, that's exactly what's going on, criminals of corporations and governments are colluding to set things to their benefits... And if it takes killing people to get it done, well, "you gotta break a few eggs to make an omelette ".

 

[sKiTzo]

How do you know these alleged suspects were Zionists?

What made you think it was "joooos"? I didn't say anything about joooos.

 

[zyzygy]

Forget the planes, the towers, the collapses, and the physics of it all. .

You do nothing else.

 

[zyzygy]

Forget the planes, the towers, the collapses, and the physics of it all. .

You do nothing else.

 

[Mark F]

What made you think it was "joooos"? I didn't say anything about joooos.

Except for one variation of the story which describes the suspects as "Palestinian", they are invariably described as "Jews" or "Mossad agents" - which is like saying the same thing only with more sinister overtones.

 

[zyzygy]

That all depends on which aspect of 911 you are talking about.

The aspects that actually happened.

 

[sKiTzo]

Except for one variation of the story which describes the suspects as "Palestinian", they are invariably described as "Jews" or "Mossad agents" - which is like saying the same thing only with more sinister overtones.

None describe the suspects as "Palestinian". What you are referring to is when one of the Israeli’s called the police:

“Dispatcher: Jersey City police.
Caller: Yes, we have a white van, 2 or 3 guys in there, they look like Palestinians and going around a building.
Caller: There’s a minivan heading toward the Holland tunnel, I see the guy by Newark Airport mixing some junk and he has those sheikh uniform.
Dispatcher: He has what?
Caller: He’s dressed like an Arab.”

And yes, they were Israeli Mossad agents. Whether they are "jooos" or not seems to matter to some people, but to me it is irrelevant.

 

[zyzygy]

None describe the suspects as "Palestinian". What you are referring to is when one of the Israeli’s called the police:

“Dispatcher: Jersey City police.
Caller: Yes, we have a white van, 2 or 3 guys in there, they look like Palestinians and going around a building.
Caller: There’s a minivan heading toward the Holland tunnel, I see the guy by Newark Airport mixing some junk and he has those sheikh uniform.
Dispatcher: He has what?
Caller: He’s dressed like an Arab.”

And yes, they were Israeli Mossad agents. Whether they are "jooos" or not seems to matter to some people, but to me it is irrelevant.

And how does that fit in with the planes flying into the buildings?