911 Aftermath: Stories of people who have spoken out against the official story

[Thoreau72]

Most of the time, the vast majority of the time, people just die.

But sometimes, people are assassinated.

 

[phoenyx]

What Henry said. Bod, I believe around 50 people were allegedly on the flight. Why do you ask? Also, did you see the video clip I linked to? I mean this one:
Mysterious Deaths of Key 9/11 Witnesses Pt. 1 - YouTube

 

[mike2810]

Most of the time, the vast majority of the time, people just die.

But sometimes, people are assassinated.

true.
You can say person X died on some date.
You can say person X died because of Y, when the medical autopsy is conclusive.
You can say person X was assassinated, when the investigation is conclusive.

Without evidence, assassination of person X is peculation/opinion.

 

[phoenyx]

true.
You can say person X died on some date.
You can say person X died because of Y, when the medical autopsy is conclusive.
You can say person X was assassinated, when the investigation is conclusive.

Without evidence, assassination of person X is peculation/opinion.

I'm sure a lot of people feel that the official story is conclusive; do you feel that way about it? In any case, I'm generally cautious about saying that something is conclusive. I find a lot regarding the official conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 to be highly unlikely if not downright impossible, and a lot of alternate theories regarding 9/11 to be highly likely.

 

[mike2810]

I'm sure a lot of people feel that the official story is conclusive; do you feel that way about it? In any case, I'm generally cautious about saying that something is conclusive. I find a lot regarding the official conspiracy theories regarding 9/11 to be highly unlikely if not downright impossible, and a lot of alternate theories regarding 9/11 to be highly likely.

I was replying to what HD wrote regarding "But sometimes, people are assassinated."

Not sure what you are getting at on my thoughts on the "official story". If you mean do I think they got it correct that the planes where hijacked, crashed into the wtc, pentagon and a field before one reached it target. Then yes.

Have follow up research by creditiable Universities, scientific and proffessional publications better define the science behind the collapse of the wtc? Then yes. The papers and simulations support the premise of the official reports.

Yes I think some CT theories are just not worth time discussing (WTC brought down by energy weapon, for example).

Please explain how you are seperating CT theories from alternative theories.

Is the "alternative theory" you are not stating the "demolition theory" If so, you have a lot of explaining and not by posting vids links. Provide links to any proffessional published paper that supports and explains how it was done.

 

[Thoreau72]

true.
You can say person X died on some date.
You can say person X died because of Y, when the medical autopsy is conclusive.
You can say person X was assassinated, when the investigation is conclusive.

Without evidence, assassination of person X is peculation/opinion.

I'm assuming Mike, that you are aware that both the Soviets and the US spy agencies have and sometimes use drugs that will kill a person by heart attack. That is, an autopsy will show that the person died of a heart attack. If the examiner does not discover how and where any drug was administered, the official report is listed as heart attack, EVEN THOUGH the truth is that the person was executed.

Are you aware of that?

 

[I_Gaze_At_The_Blue]

I'm assuming Mike, that you are aware that both the Soviets and the US spy agencies have and sometimes use drugs that will kill a person by heart attack. That is, an autopsy will show that the person died of a heart attack. If the examiner does not discover how and where any drug was administered, the official report is listed as heart attack, EVEN THOUGH the truth is that the person was executed.

Are you aware of that?

Yawn ... you still NEED evidence though.

Got any ... or do you just truly believe everything in life is like a bad B-movie script ???

 

[mike2810]

I'm assuming Mike, that you are aware that both the Soviets and the US spy agencies have and sometimes use drugs that will kill a person by heart attack. That is, an autopsy will show that the person died of a heart attack. If the examiner does not discover how and where any drug was administered, the official report is listed as heart attack, EVEN THOUGH the truth is that the person was executed.

Are you aware of that?

yes, there is exceptions to about anything.
Are you aware there can be evidence other than medical that someone was assisinated>

So the challenge is prove someone from the 911 witness was assisinated.
I am waiting for the proof.

 

[phoenyx]

I'm assuming Mike, that you are aware that both the Soviets and the US spy agencies have and sometimes use drugs that will kill a person by heart attack. That is, an autopsy will show that the person died of a heart attack. If the examiner does not discover how and where any drug was administered, the official report is listed as heart attack, EVEN THOUGH the truth is that the person was executed.

Are you aware of that?

yes, there is exceptions to about anything.
Are you aware there can be evidence other than medical that someone was assassinated?

So the challenge is prove someone from the 911 witness was assassinated.
I am waiting for the proof.

I think you have the wrong impression here mike. Who here has claimed that there is proof that any of the deaths of 911 witnesses has been proven to be an assassination? We've simply offered evidence that many of the deaths were highly suspect.

 

[Thoreau72]

yes, there is exceptions to about anything.
Are you aware there can be evidence other than medical that someone was assisinated>

So the challenge is prove someone from the 911 witness was assisinated.
I am waiting for the proof.

I have not made that claim Mike, so I have nothing to prove.

Is it possible? Of course, but I am neutral on such matters. There are much more obvious defects with the official narrative than the deaths of certain people, but I must admit some of them are most interesting.

When one is dealing with various federal agencies whose very existence is based upon analysis and collection of evidence, finding evidence against them is very much a long shot.

 

[mike2810]

I think you have the wrong impression here mike. Who here has claimed that there is proof that any of the deaths of 911 witnesses has been proven to be an assassination? We've simply offered evidence that many of the deaths were highly suspect.

HDavid brought the topic up. I took it as it being related to the topic being discussed. Granted HD did not specifically say that any of the people were assisinated.
Now why would someone bring the topic up if not tied to the subject being discussed?

Oh wait, I know, so someone can make the statement "I never said they were assisinated".

So guess you need to ask HDavid why he brought it up.

 

[mike2810]

I have not made that claim Mike, so I have nothing to prove.

Is it possible? Of course, but I am neutral on such matters. There are much more obvious defects with the official narrative than the deaths of certain people, but I must admit some of them are most interesting.

When one is dealing with various federal agencies whose very existence is based upon analysis and collection of evidence, finding evidence against them is very much a long shot.

So why did you bring it up?
Do you frequently post statements not tied to the topic at hand?

So how is someone to interupt your post26 when the topic is deaths of 911 witnesses, and I quote:
"Most of the time, the vast majority of the time, people just die.
But sometimes, people are assassinated. "

phoenyx: you happened to like HD post 26. So how can you say noone stated or made a tie to assisinations.

You are not neutral. Your post show different.

------------

If you both want to play the wordsmith/symanics game, there is nothing more to discuss.

 

[Thoreau72]

You better have another cup of coffee Mike, or perhaps you should cut the stuff out.

Please notice the thread title, NOT started by myself, in which the deaths of certain people who were somehow affiliated with the events of the day, and who had testified about those events, are discussed.

I did not start the thread Mike, I merely offered a comment regarding the posts made by other posters. Is that authorized?

 

[mike2810]

You better have another cup of coffee Mike, or perhaps you should cut the stuff out.

Please notice the thread title, NOT started by myself, in which the deaths of certain people who were somehow affiliated with the events of the day, and who had testified about those events, are discussed.

I did not start the thread Mike, I merely offered a comment regarding the posts made by other posters. Is that authorized?

ah so you like to disrail threads?

Care to explain you meaning of your post 26.

 

[Bodi]

What Henry said. Bod, I believe around 50 people were allegedly on the flight. Why do you ask? Also, did you see the video clip I linked to? I mean this one:
Mysterious Deaths of Key 9/11 Witnesses Pt. 1 - YouTube

Because the more people that die as a result of "mysterious circumstances" the more people will start to believe that it is a conspiracy.

Killing many to silence a few is literally stupid.

I ask because it shows an illogical process of thought to think that killing many will end the issue. Pretty simple.

 

[Bodi]

I think you have the wrong impression here mike. Who here has claimed that there is proof that any of the deaths of 911 witnesses has been proven to be an assassination? We've simply offered evidence that many of the deaths were highly suspect.

Great. So until there is proof then we can ignore all the "mysterious" aspects of it and consider it just normal life and death...

 

[phoenyx]

I think you have the wrong impression here mike. Who here has claimed that there is proof that any of the deaths of 911 witnesses has been proven to be an assassination? We've simply offered evidence that many of the deaths were highly suspect.

Great. So until there is proof then we can ignore all the "mysterious" aspects of it and consider it just normal life and death...

You really work that way Bod? 'No proof here, nothing to see here folks' type deal? Reminds me of little red riding hood when she meets up with "grandma":
'Oh! grandmother,' she said, 'what big ears you have!'

'All the better to hear you with, my child,' was the reply.

'But, grandmother, what big eyes you have!' she said.

'All the better to see you with, my dear.'

'But, grandmother, what large hands you have!'

'All the better to hug you with.'

At this point, I think it's clear that we probably shouldn't be asking the government any more questions. After all, there really is only one question left...

'Oh! but, grandmother, what a terrible big mouth you have!'

The answer isn't pretty:
'All the better to eat you with!'

Let's just hope it doesn't get to the point where the U.S. army is trying to disarm the U.S. people...

 

[Bodi]

You really work that way Bod? 'No proof here, nothing to see here folks' type deal? Reminds me of little red riding hood when she meets up with "grandma":
'Oh! grandmother,' she said, 'what big ears you have!'

'All the better to hear you with, my child,' was the reply.

'But, grandmother, what big eyes you have!' she said.

'All the better to see you with, my dear.'

'But, grandmother, what large hands you have!'

'All the better to hug you with.'

At this point, I think it's clear that we probably shouldn't be asking the government any more questions. After all, there really is only one question left...

'Oh! but, grandmother, what a terrible big mouth you have!'

The answer isn't pretty:
'All the better to eat you with!'

Let's just hope it doesn't get to the point where the U.S. army is trying to disarm the U.S. people...

Obviously that is not what I am saying... What are you on? :lol:

 

[I_Gaze_At_The_Blue]

We've simply offered evidence that many of the deaths were highly suspect.

And since WHEN have home-made OPINION pieces on GooToob qualified as "evidence" ???

You people simply DON'T have the first clue as to what PROPERLY constitutes "evidence" !!!

 

[phoenyx]

Great. So until there is proof then we can ignore all the "mysterious" aspects of it and consider it just normal life and death...

You really work that way Bod? 'No proof here, nothing to see here folks' type deal?

Obviously that is not what I am saying... What are you on? :lol:

You said "until there is proof then we can ignore all the "mysterious" aspects of it and consider it just normal life and death..."

You seem to be implying that we should ignore all evidence so long as that evidence isn't conclusive. Personally, I find that if something smells funny, one should go investigate the smell, but you seem to be saying that as long as we don't have -proof- that something is actually wrong, we should simply ignore the anomalies and carry on.

 

[phoenyx]

And since WHEN have home-made OPINION pieces on GooToob qualified as "evidence" ??? You people simply DON'T have the first clue as to what PROPERLY constitutes "evidence" !!!

You love making assertions but you're not that keen on backing them up. For starters, I think it would be wise to define evidence for the purposes of this discussion. I've taken the first few lines from wikipedia's definition of the term to help us out here:
"Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. Giving or procuring evidence is the process of using those things that are either (a) presumed to be true, or (b) were in fact proven via evidence, to demonstrate an assertion's truth. Evidence is the currency by which one fulfills the burden of proof."

Whether the evidence is found on youtube or elsewhere is irrelevant. The main point is, does the evidence hold up? In in the case Paul Wellstone, for instance, I think there is strong evidence that he was assassinated, based on the information in this video:
The Strange Death Of Senator Paul Wellstone « eddieleaks.org

 

[Thoreau72]

Another name that might be added to the list of "people who knew too much" is Carter Beese, who "committed suicide" in 2006

 

[phoenyx]

Another name that might be added to the list of "people who knew too much" is Carter Beese, who "committed suicide" in 2006

Did a quick google, from the looks of this thread at prisonplanet.com, it seems clear that this Mr. Beese and what he was involved in is definitely worthy of note regarding 911...
BAE Systems - bribes - Prince Bandar - 9/11 attacks

 

[phoenyx]

Found another article regarding Mr. Beese:
National Corruption Index :: John Carter Beese Jr.

 

[Thoreau72]

Thanks for that link Phoenyx. I only learned his name yesterday, reading the piece by Eastman et al.

No surprise he was in on the ground floor at Carlyle.