9/11

[TigerForce]

Okay Disco, lay it out then. You say it was not Bin Laden and his band of merry men, then who was it?

How can you possibly close a case by accusing one person based on assumption ?

7 long years have passed and we still have no true answer. This is why different opinions continue to debate.

 

[Disco08]

I don't know '74, there isn't much evidence of who masterminded the events that took place. The facts I'm interested in are the ones that are readily available. These facts are the ones being questioned by many experts with relevant knowledge. Just because you question one version of events does not mean you have to posit an entire theory does it?

All you seem interested in doing is making those of us that question the official version look like idiots.

 

[evo]

Yep that would be correct.
I also have a bit of an issue with the pentagon crash.
Reckon it's possible the US might have shot a bird out of the sky or something else when a little awry.
Looked pretty sus that one.

Anyone who posits that the damage to the Pentagon wasn't caused by AA flight 77(say it was a guided missle or some other nonesense) has to give reasonable explanation of where theses peopel are:

http://www.911familiesforamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/33.jpg

Home safe with their spouses and all keeping quiet?

Taken to a naval base and all slaughtered by there own governemnt?

what?

 

[Tiger74]

How can you possibly close a case by accusing one person based on assumption ?

7 long years have passed and we still have no true answer. This is why different opinions continue to debate.

What do you believe though, because everytime I get someone forwarding me a 9/11 powerpoint or link that outlines "the truth", its the usual US Govt conspiracy to start a war in Iraq by crashing USAF cargo planes into the WTC and hitting the Pentagon with a cruise missile. Most of the military and the "military establishment" are in on it, as it the entire Jewish world (hence the reason people keep saying no Jews went to work in the WTC on the day of the attack).

If you differ from this view, great let me know. But the above has generally been discredited as ramblings and lies generated from racists and nutters afraid of the one world govt in the US.

 

[Disco08]

Anyone who posits that the damage to the Pentagon wasn't caused by AA flight 77(say it was a guided missle or some other nonesense) has to give reasonable explanation of where theses peopel are:

http://www.911familiesforamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/33.jpg

Home safe with their spouses and all keeping quiet?

Taken to a naval base and all slaughtered by there own governemnt?

what?

Why must someone that questions whether the evidence suggests a 757 piloted by a novice pilot with little skill hit the pentagon be required to explain the whereabouts of flight 77 when there is no evidence to work with to that end?

 

[Tiger74]

I don't know '74, there isn't much evidence of who masterminded the events that took place. The facts I'm interested in are the ones that are readily available. These facts are the ones being questioned by many experts with relevant knowledge. Just because you question one version of events does not mean you have to posit an entire theory does it?

All you seem interested in doing is making those of us that question the official version look like idiots.

I just covered this in the post to TF. You have been saying the US Govt is lying, which therefore infers they are behind it. As such, you need to at least show some rationale for why/how you think they did it.

My main frustration is the people pushing the "George W did it" line keep peddling the same "facts", most of which have been disproven quite easily. Lets forget about car park cameras at the Pentagon, and flight paths in NY. The most common one I keep hearing is that no Jews went to work in the WTC on 9/11 because they were warned of the coming attack. Stupid thing is Jewish people did die in the building, and this has been reconfirmed again and again. Yet the same rubbish keeps being put up, and because its said so often, people start to believe it.

 

[TigerForce]

What do you believe though, because everytime I get someone forwarding me a 9/11 powerpoint or link that outlines "the truth", its the usual US Govt conspiracy to start a war in Iraq by crashing USAF cargo planes into the WTC and hitting the Pentagon with a cruise missile. Most of the military and the "military establishment" are in on it, as it the entire Jewish world (hence the reason people keep saying no Jews went to work in the WTC on the day of the attack).

If you differ from this view, great let me know. But the above has generally been discredited as ramblings and lies generated from racists and nutters afraid of the one world govt in the US.

Nutters in this case are a minority, just like scumbags who protest against cops (g20 summit) at anytime just for the fun of it.

We're not nutters on this forum and just have different opinions on whatever evidence has been brought forward.

I posted before that because this 9/11 has not had any trial, as other terrorist cases have, it remains unsolved and still interesting to look and research into.

It's difficult to find out whether it's true evidence or not because we rely on whatever the media provide (internet, papers).

My assumption has always been against US government because of the war-hungry mentality Bush Snr & Jnr have had for years.

 

[evo]

Why must someone that questions whether the evidence suggests a 757 piloted by a novice pilot with little skill hit the pentagon be required to explain the whereabouts of flight 77 when there is no evidence to work with to that end?

Because you are claiming the official story is not true and there is a big hole in the Pentagon that needs explaning. .If you want to create reasonable doubt you need a reasonable alternate hypothesis.

A reasonable alternative,in my view,would have to account for all those missing people.No-one has done it so the case against is extremely weak.

 

[Tiger74]

Nutters in this case are a minority, just like scumbags who protest against cops (g20 summit) at anytime just for the fun of it.

We're not nutters on this forum and just have different opinions on whatever evidence has been brought forward.

I posted before that because this 9/11 has not had any trial, as other terrorist cases have, it remains unsolved and still interesting to look and research into.

It's difficult to find out whether it's true evidence or not because we rely on whatever the media provide (internet, papers).

My assumption has always been against US government because of the war-hungry mentality Bush Snr & Jnr have had for years.

Just two things.

Firstly its not unsolved because no trial has taken place, just untested. The one bad thing about any suicide attack (or even lone gun man who offs himself) is that you have no-one to charge at the end of it because the main people are dead. You can do your coronial inquiry (or commission as they did with 9/11), but I agree its not the same.

Secondly, the last sentence is where we all need to be careful. I have no love for George W, and will be very happy to see him carted off to Crawford Texas in January. However we need to make sure that bias doesn't colour our perceptions. Just because the guy exploited the situation doesn't mean he created it.

 

[Liverpool]

FFS Disco.... :


Bin Laden: Yes, I did it
OSAMA BIN LADEN has for the first time admitted that his al-Qa'eda group carried out the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the Telegraph can reveal.
In a previously undisclosed video which has been circulating for 14 days among his supporters, he confesses that "history should be a witness that we are terrorists. Yes, we kill their innocents".
In the footage, shot in the Afghan mountains at the end of October, a smiling bin Laden goes on to say that the World Trade Centre's twin towers were a "legitimate target" and the pilots who hijacked the planes were "blessed by Allah".
The killing of at least 4,537 people was justified, he claims, because they were "not civilians" but were working for the American system.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1362113/Bin-Laden-Yes,-I-did-it.html


Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report
Popular Mechanics examines the evidence and consults the experts to refute the most persistent conspiracy theories of September 11.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

Remember...if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and smells like a duck......then there is a good chance it ain't a dog!
The big bad Yanks aren't always behind everything out of the ordinary.

 

[Disco08]

Not interested in getting into a link war with you on this Livers. There's too many.

As for looking like and smelling like a duck, that principle applies equally to the evidence against the official report.

Because you are claiming the official story is not true and there is a big hole in the Pentagon that needs explaning. .If you want to create reasonable doubt you need a reasonable alternate hypothesis.

A reasonable alternative,in my view,would have to account for all those missing people.No-one has done it so the case against is extremely weak.

Doesn't it makes sense to only try and work the evidence at hand? Should the world's leading experts on 757's and airline crashes keep their opinions to themselves if they conflict with the official report simply because they can't explain what happened to the jet that reportedly hit the pentagon? How are they supposed to know what happened to it?

I just covered this in the post to TF. You have been saying the US Govt is lying, which therefore infers they are behind it. As such, you need to at least show some rationale for why/how you think they did it.

My main frustration is the people pushing the "George W did it" line keep peddling the same "facts", most of which have been disproven quite easily. Lets forget about car park cameras at the Pentagon, and flight paths in NY. The most common one I keep hearing is that no Jews went to work in the WTC on 9/11 because they were warned of the coming attack. Stupid thing is Jewish people did die in the building, and this has been reconfirmed again and again. Yet the same rubbish keeps being put up, and because its said so often, people start to believe it.

Firstly, why am I necessarily inferring anything if I state that the US government's report is false?

Secondly, I've read a bit about this stuff, and I don't recall hearing the line about no Jews going to work much, if at all. The facts that interest me are things such as (large groups of) pilots questioning the possibility of the proposed flight path of AA77 or structural engineers questioning the the theory that WTC7 collapsed into it's footprint due to fire and debris, among other things. If these experts are all sceptical of the official version of events shouldn't that raise alarm bells and also prompt more open discussion on such things?

Have you seen the transcript from Japanese parliament in January this year. Interesting reading IMO (if it can be verified of course, but it's an elaborate lie if it's fake).

In some cases it's easy to work out why someone might be lying. In other cases it's not so easy.

 

[1eyedtiger]

Bin Laden: Yes, I did it
OSAMA BIN LADEN has for the first time admitted that his al-Qa'eda group carried out the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the Telegraph can reveal.
In a previously undisclosed video which has been circulating for 14 days among his supporters, he confesses that "history should be a witness that we are terrorists. Yes, we kill their innocents".
In the footage, shot in the Afghan mountains at the end of October, a smiling bin Laden goes on to say that the World Trade Centre's twin towers were a "legitimate target" and the pilots who hijacked the planes were "blessed by Allah".
The killing of at least 4,537 people was justified, he claims, because they were "not civilians" but were working for the American system.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1362113/Bin-Laden-Yes,-I-did-it.html

Under this definition, there is no such thing as civilians. Everybody can be considered to be working for their government in one form or another. Looks like everyone is now a legitimate target.

 

[Panthera tigris FC]

Not interested in getting into a link war with you on this Livers. There's too many.

As for looking like and smelling like a duck, that principle applies equally to the evidence against the official report.

Doesn't it makes sense to only try and work the evidence at hand? Should the world's leading experts on 757's and airline crashes keep their opinions to themselves if they conflict with the official report simply because they can't explain what happened to the jet that reportedly hit the pentagon? How are they supposed to know what happened to it?

Firstly, why am I necessarily inferring anything if I state that the US government's report is false?

Secondly, I've read a bit about this stuff, and I don't recall hearing the line about no Jews going to work much, if at all. The facts that interest me are things such as (large groups of) pilots questioning the possibility of the proposed flight path of AA77 or structural engineers questioning the the theory that WTC7 collapsed into it's footprint due to fire and debris, among other things. If these experts are all sceptical of the official version of events shouldn't that raise alarm bells and also prompt more open discussion on such things?

Have you seen the transcript from Japanese parliament in January this year. Interesting reading IMO (if it can be verified of course, but it's an elaborate lie if it's fake).

In some cases it's easy to work out why someone might be lying. In other cases it's not so easy.

No offense Disco, but you are being very cagey on this discussion. Can you clearly state the opinion you have formed based on the evidence that you have evaluated. It is clear that you see discrepancies in the official version, but you won't be tied to any alternative explanation. It makes it hard to debate when one side refuses to state their position.

 

[evo]

Doesn't it makes sense to only try and work the evidence at hand?

I am. There is evidence of a flight AA77 with those people on it.

I saw first hand evidence(admitedly via TV) of 2 other flights being flown into WTC 1 + 2.

There is a plane size hole in the Pentagon,and a missing plane and passengers.

And people who there say it was a large plane that did it.

There is plane wreckage strewn around the site.

Should the world's leading experts on 757's and airline crashes keep their opinions to themselves if they conflict with the official report simply because they can't explain what happened to the jet that reportedly hit the pentagon?

No,people,experts or otherwise, can say what they want.Why do you keep throwing up red herring questions?

But if they want to convince reasonable people it wasn't a AA 77 that hit the Pentagon,they are going to have to provide a reasonable alternative explanation to explain a big hole,and a missing plane.

 

[Liverpool]

Not interested in getting into a link war with you on this Livers. There's too many.
As for looking like and smelling like a duck, that principle applies equally to the evidence against the official report.

No need for a link war...but for someone who has read a lot about this topic, surely the man himself (Bin Laden) admitting to 9/11 would override any of these other fantasies that seem to flood the internet.

 

[Tiger74]

Firstly, why am I necessarily inferring anything if I state that the US government's report is false?

Not just false, deliberately false. Why would the US Govt fake a reports outcome?

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

Have you seen the transcript from Japanese parliament in January this year. Interesting reading IMO (if it can be verified of course, but it's an elaborate lie if it's fake).

Disco, you can find Japanese Parliament members who belied that the war in the Pacific was started by the Americans, the Japanese were a well behaved army that was merely liberating South East Asian national from their colonial overlords and the only bad thing that happened in that war was the dropping of the atomic bomb.

 

[Tigers of Old]

I am. There is evidence of a flight AA77 with those people on it.

I saw first hand evidence(admitedly via TV) of 2 other flights being flown into WTC 1 + 2.

There is a plane size hole in the Pentagon,and a missing plane and passengers.

And people who there say it was a large plane that did it.

There is plane wreckage strewn around the site.

No,people,experts or otherwise, can say what they want.Why do you keep throwing up red herring questions?

But if they want to convince reasonable people it wasn't a AA 77 that hit the Pentagon,they are going to have to provide a reasonable alternative explanation to explain a big hole,and a missing plane.

I am not suggesting that AA 77 crash into the site because I don't really know but to me this is the strangest incident of the lot.
The size of the hole & that only one video release captured the incident, leads to more questions than it answers.
Also plenty of 'people' suggested it wasn't a plane that hit the building at all but something else (ie a missile).

My pure guess is that the US might have been forced to shoot down the passenger plane and then perhaps attempted to cover it up by shooting into a target area that they knew they could control(a vacant wing of the Pentagon) to cover it up but tbh that's still a stretch.

I guess I can swallow the official US gov. line.

 

[Disco08]

Not just false, deliberately false. Why would the US Govt fake a reports outcome?

As evo and ToO say, maybe it's to cover up incompetence?

No offense Disco, but you are being very cagey on this discussion. Can you clearly state the opinion you have formed based on the evidence that you have evaluated. It is clear that you see discrepancies in the official version, but you won't be tied to any alternative explanation. It makes it hard to debate when one side refuses to state their position.

I honestly don't know Pantera. I'd rather discuss the facts one by one than try and draw conclusion of the overall chain of events.

No,people,experts or otherwise, can say what they want.Why do you keep throwing up red herring questions?

But if they want to convince reasonable people it wasn't a AA 77 that hit the Pentagon,they are going to have to provide a reasonable alternative explanation to explain a big hole,and a missing plane.

Is still don't see why, which is why I asked the question you deem to be another red herring. I can see the need to explain the big hole, as it is the same evidence being used to suggest the hole was not made by a 757. What I don't see is how anyone who holds a different theory on what caused that hole could possibly know what happened to the plane that was reported to have made the hole.

I think Michael Moore's question is valid. There are at least 80 video cameras on that area. Why doesn't the government just release video footage of the event to silence the critics?

No need for a link war...but for someone who has read a lot about this topic, surely the man himself (Bin Laden) admitting to 9/11 would override any of these other fantasies that seem to flood the internet.

I'm not interested in fantasies Livers. I'm mostly interest in the opinion of experts on the events in question. Bin Laden's claims (whether real, mistranslated, fake - many theories abound) don't change the evidence surrounding other events of 9/11 at all.

I'm answering all your questions boys. Can you answer the question whether you all believe the commission report is accurate, word for word? Yes or no is fine.

 

[evo]

I am not suggesting that AA 77 crash into the site because I don't really know but to me this is the strangest incident of the lot.

The only part about that day that gives some pause is the way building 7 falls.

It did burn for 12 hours though so willing to accept the official position.

Also plenty of 'people' suggested it wasn't a plane that hit the building at all but something else (ie a missile).

Rubbish.There is just the impression of plenty of people who claim it is a missle.

Plenty of people saw a passenger plane.They just aren't highlighted becuaese it supports the official story.

My pure guess is that the US might have been forced to shoot down the passenger plane and then perhaps attempted to cover it up by shooting into a target area that they knew they could control(a vacant wing of the Pentagon) to cover it up but tbh that's still a stretch.

Wouldn't there be debris strewn all over washington dc?

How could a plane be shot from the sky and not one piece found?But yet loads of pieces in the Pentagon--but that evidence is dubious. ???