Community > Politics, Current News & Events

Previous 1 2 … 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next

Topic: 9/11 Facts That Need To Be Addressed
mightymoe Joined Sun 11/19/06 Posts: 37362	Wed 03/13/13 10:38 AM
Yes, but I am not certain that there is sufficient proof that 19 pissed off muslims even boarded the planes as reported. There is something else going on here, and the CIA is involved. "sufficient proof" is a broad term, what's sufficient to you may not be to me, or vice versa... the phone calls, the flight manifests, even the passport found all points to them being correct for me... The passport was (probably) a plant. (It can't be proven otherwise) The flight manifests were not the originals and the substitute flight manifests (fakes) had mistakes and names were changed, the phone calls (from the planes?) were not proof either. --There was no telling where those came from or if they were even real. Sorry, there was no proof at all. there was no proof that a triliuonioum impact cluster bomb wasn't used, either... The difference between your example and mine is that you are talking about proving a negative assertion. The "19 angry hijackers story" has been stated by officialdom to be the fact of what happened on 9-11. That is the claim that has not been sufficiently proven. There is no indisputable chain of evidence or papers that prove any of that. I can't prove 19 Muslim terrorists didn't high-jack those planes, but the 9-11 investigators and government PR puppets can't prove they did!! It is all guess work, speculation and theory. The story could very possibly be 90% propaganda. well, i can see how someone unfamiliar with construction and physics could see it as a hoax, but if they decided to study more, they could probably see where their thinking was wrong.... but as for me, the explanation they gave as to why the buildings fell makes almost perfect sense... metal loses tinsel strength when heated, thats a law of physics.. the hotter the fire, the more the steel will lose it's strength... add that to the weight of the buildings, the obvious metal beams bulging before they fell and the pancaking effect all falls into what should have happened... and the Buildings disintegrating from the Point of Impact down,not from the Base up as they would be in Controlled Demolition! yes, and that never really seems to be discussed very much either... would demolish all of their "Theories" from the Ground upward! i like they keep posting those videos where 6 people said they heard multiple explosions... i guess people have never heard concrete snapping from pressure before...

Conrad_73 Joined Sat 09/29/07 Posts: 22488	Wed 03/13/13 10:49 AM
Yes, but I am not certain that there is sufficient proof that 19 pissed off muslims even boarded the planes as reported. There is something else going on here, and the CIA is involved. "sufficient proof" is a broad term, what's sufficient to you may not be to me, or vice versa... the phone calls, the flight manifests, even the passport found all points to them being correct for me... The passport was (probably) a plant. (It can't be proven otherwise) The flight manifests were not the originals and the substitute flight manifests (fakes) had mistakes and names were changed, the phone calls (from the planes?) were not proof either. --There was no telling where those came from or if they were even real. Sorry, there was no proof at all. there was no proof that a triliuonioum impact cluster bomb wasn't used, either... The difference between your example and mine is that you are talking about proving a negative assertion. The "19 angry hijackers story" has been stated by officialdom to be the fact of what happened on 9-11. That is the claim that has not been sufficiently proven. There is no indisputable chain of evidence or papers that prove any of that. I can't prove 19 Muslim terrorists didn't high-jack those planes, but the 9-11 investigators and government PR puppets can't prove they did!! It is all guess work, speculation and theory. The story could very possibly be 90% propaganda. well, i can see how someone unfamiliar with construction and physics could see it as a hoax, but if they decided to study more, they could probably see where their thinking was wrong.... but as for me, the explanation they gave as to why the buildings fell makes almost perfect sense... metal loses tinsel strength when heated, thats a law of physics.. the hotter the fire, the more the steel will lose it's strength... add that to the weight of the buildings, the obvious metal beams bulging before they fell and the pancaking effect all falls into what should have happened... and the Buildings disintegrating from the Point of Impact down,not from the Base up as they would be in Controlled Demolition! yes, and that never really seems to be discussed very much either... would demolish all of their "Theories" from the Ground upward! i like they keep posting those videos where 6 people said they heard multiple explosions... i guess people have never heard concrete snapping from pressure before... most likely not!

HotRodDeluxe Joined Sun 05/06/12 Posts: 2743	Wed 03/13/13 01:33 PM Edited by HotRodDeluxe on Wed 03/13/13 01:34 PM
The passport was (probably) a plant. (It can't be proven otherwise) It can't be proven that it was a fake, so this is just ridiculous. The flight manifests were not the originals and the substitute flight manifests (fakes) had mistakes and names were changed, Well, they were good enough as evidence on the court for the Moussaoui trial. Where is the proof of this fraud? the phone calls (from the planes?) were not proof either. --There was no telling where those came from or if they were even real. Ah, there is....try thinking about it. The "19 angry hijackers story" has been stated by officialdom to be the fact of what happened on 9-11. That is the claim that has not been sufficiently proven. There is no indisputable chain of evidence or papers that prove any of that. Again, try the evidence for the Moussaoui trial. A great resource for this kind of nonsense. I can't prove 19 Muslim terrorists didn't high-jack those planes, but the 9-11 investigators and government PR puppets can't prove they did!! It is all guess work, speculation and theory. The story could very possibly be 90% propaganda. You can't prove it and it is all guess work and weak hypotheses. Yet, you wonder why people think CTer's are idiots?

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Wed 03/13/13 05:36 PM Edited by Jeanniebean on Wed 03/13/13 06:01 PM
The passport was (probably) a plant. (It can't be proven otherwise) It can't be proven that it was a fake, so this is just ridiculous. The flight manifests were not the originals and the substitute flight manifests (fakes) had mistakes and names were changed, Well, they were good enough as evidence on the court for the Moussaoui trial. Where is the proof of this fraud? the phone calls (from the planes?) were not proof either. --There was no telling where those came from or if they were even real. Ah, there is....try thinking about it. The "19 angry hijackers story" has been stated by officialdom to be the fact of what happened on 9-11. That is the claim that has not been sufficiently proven. There is no indisputable chain of evidence or papers that prove any of that. Again, try the evidence for the Moussaoui trial. A great resource for this kind of nonsense. I can't prove 19 Muslim terrorists didn't high-jack those planes, but the 9-11 investigators and government PR puppets can't prove they did!! It is all guess work, speculation and theory. The story could very possibly be 90% propaganda. You can't prove it and it is all guess work and weak hypotheses. Yet, you wonder why people think CTer's are idiots? I already said I can't prove it either way. Did you miss that? And again, the 9-11 investigators nor the government can not prove any of their claims either. It just speculation and theory. I don't have to prove the passport was planted, because it has not been proven that it was legitimate. The name of the person who allegedly found it is ... UNKNOWN. That is a chain of evidence problem. That unknown person could have planted it. ... then he disappeared. Again, try the evidence for the Moussaoui trial. A great resource for this kind of nonsense. Thanks for the suggestion. Looking at that will take a while. Have you looked at all of it? Can you direct me to something crucial in particular? If you have, please point to the specific evidence that proves the passport found has a proper chain of evidence. The name of the man who actually found it and handed it over would be good. Also, if you have been over all of that evidence, please point to the recordings of the alleged phone calls made from the planes. I would like to listen to them.

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Wed 03/13/13 06:04 PM
Wikipedia: ... three jurors decided Moussaoui had only limited knowledge of the September 11 plot, and three described his role in the attacks as minor, if he had any role at all.

Jeanniebean Joined Wed 01/30/08 Posts: 40028	Wed 03/13/13 06:12 PM
Hotrod, I've been looking at the endless list of "evidence" for the Moussaoui trial and so far it looks like a waste of time.. If you have any particular point to make or evidence that you think proves anything, please link to it.