911 Truth Movement

[tigersnake]

You can't tell me they risked that through fear of embarassment over their performance. Has either of them even admitted to being less than happy with the way they performed their duty on 9/11?

I can and I have. Its not controversial, yet you are saying 'you can't tell me...' as if its some kind of whacky, way out theory. And no they haven't admitted it, politicians rarely do, particularly when the stakes are high, and they don't get any higher, that's why they didn't want any systematic and close scrutiny. Their performance was found sadly wanting in the immediate aftermath, then they kind of got their act together, and of course the PR machine would have cranked up, Bush started to puff his chest up and all that. Its all pretty straightforward.

 

[Baloo]

Bush holding the book upside down was a sidebar to a number of other points in the same post you've totally ignored. I already admitted error on that point as well but I'm sure you can harp on about it for a few more posts.

I picked one at random and scored big time. Why is the onus on me now to prove or disprove the rest of your claims. How about you check your facts with google and see if they stand up. I don't see why I need to do anymore.

The commisson was the only investigation into the full scope of evidence surrounding 9/11. I've already explained why that page doesn't debunk that fact at all.

I said it was false or at least misleading and I stand by that. You've now narrowed what you mean by investigation which proves my point that the initial claim wasn't correct.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

I totally debunked the Bush holding a book upside down while being told the a plane had crashed into the WTC (btw, how do you know the US knew they were under attack at that point ?).

The second page is where the fact you're stating is wrong, or at least misleading. One investigation cost 15mill, but it wasnt the only investigation.

Also note, neither of those two pieces of information came from the debunking site I posted. They came from a google search.

Glad we've stopped the apologist crap, man I hate labels. It is lazy and foolish to attempt to categorise people into simply defined groups. And it smacks of the condescension being accused of others. I can only agree that it seems disingenuous at best to use material that has been proved to be, possibly maliciously, inaccurate and then claim the point of the argument is the covering up of the incompetence of the most incompetent president in recent history. Is any of this surprising, let alone evidence of a conspiracy? And if we aren't arguing about a conspiracy then I really am confused.

 

[Disco08]

Apologist is not a condescending term at all KR. All it indicates is the group accepting the official narrative. One major Christian site calls itself Apologetics.com for God's sake.

I'm not quite following the rest of your post but obviously you think I've been disingenuous or even maliciously dishonest in this discussion. If you'd like to actually discuss that with me feel free to quote the relevant post(s).

I picked one at random and scored big time. Why is the onus on me now to prove or disprove the rest of your claims. How about you check your facts with google and see if they stand up. I don't see why I need to do anymore.

I said it was false or at least misleading and I stand by that. You've now narrowed what you mean by investigation which proves my point that the initial claim wasn't correct.

"investigation" and "commission" are interchangeable terms in this discussion.

The upside down book was by far the least of the points I was making in that post. Ignore the rest for all I care but don't pretend debunking it proves anything.

I'm also not going to apologise for not double checking every fact I post, especially not something like the upside down book which was a throw away line with no point behind it.

"Scored big time" eh? :hihi

I can and I have. Its not controversial, yet you are saying 'you can't tell me...' as if its some kind of whacky, way out theory. And no they haven't admitted it, politicians rarely do, particularly when the stakes are high, and they don't get any higher, that's why they didn't want any systematic and close scrutiny. Their performance was found sadly wanting in the immediate aftermath, then they kind of got their act together, and of course the PR machine would have cranked up, Bush started to puff his chest up and all that. Its all pretty straightforward.

"You can't tell me...." is a figure of speech. Don't read too much into it. Anyway, I totally disagree with your reasoning. By making these absurd demands they've brought immense suspicion and speculation upon themselves. They would have known this would happen. What's worse, embarrasment or speculation that you're behind the deaths of thousands of the civilians you were sworn to protect?

 

[tigersnake]

If you think there were stuff ups wouldn't that imply those same stuff ups could have been deliberate acts to allow the plot to succeed?

It in no way implies that.

 

[Disco08]

Sorry, poorly worded. It implies the possibility.

 

[tigersnake]

I just don't see any evidence. I went through a phase when I thought it might be possible, around 06-7, but then I did some reading and there's just no evidence. There are some coincidences that you'd find in any complex situation if you look hard enough. A very audacious and lucky plan by some fanatics that took advantage of very poor security. Once they had control of the planes, there was no stopping it. All happened very quickly. Thats it. Its just incredible that such valuable and iconic buildings and human lives are so vulnerable in peacetime.

 

[Disco08]

"Some coincidences" is a massive understatement. When a group of coincidences all seem to fit into a certain scenario they come close to becoming circumstantial evidence. I mean, if the photo of the plane that's supposedly flight 175 that seems to show a grey fuselage with no windows could be enhanced enough to make it incontrovertable proof of that fact - for argument's sake - how much would that change the light in which people view these coincidences? Alternatively, if Berry Jennings was still alive and could somehow prove he heard explosions and saw the results of them before either tower collapsed, as he claimed, would that then make apologists more willing to give credit to evidence some experts insist demonstrates that WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition?

The Norway massacre was a complex situation. Can you name me any coincidences that point to anything other than the official narrative supported by all the eyewitnesses?

Cheney knew flight 93 was on it's way to Washington from at least 50 miles out. That's more than enough time to stop it.

 

[Baloo]

The last one for me. There is no point doing this if you don't even do a rudimentary check of the "facts" you're reading on conspiracy sites. No need to double check the facts on these conspiracy sites, just checking once would be enough.

A plane with no windows hit WTC 2.

Here's a picture of the plane wreckage.

http://www.fema.gov/photolibrary/photo_details.do?id=12390

 

[tigersnake]

"Some coincidences" is a massive understatement.

Cheney knew flight 93 was on it's way to Washington from at least 50 miles out. That's more than enough time to stop it.

Its not a massive understatement.

Assuming what you're saying is true re Cheney. thats 80km, how fast are planes? 500km/hr? 7 or 8 minutes? I dunno if that would be enough time to stop it.

Anyway, refer my previous post, or Chomsky.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Come on little Stanley Wawrinka!

 

[MOTiger]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGo1DqmfHjY

 

[Disco08]

The last one for me. There is no point doing this if you don't even do a rudimentary check of the "facts" you're reading on conspiracy sites. No need to double check the facts on these conspiracy sites, just checking once would be enough.

A plane with no windows hit WTC 2.

Here's a picture of the plane wreckage.

http://www.fema.gov/photolibrary/photo_details.do?id=12390

That, as far as I know, is the only photo of passenger jet wreckage ever found at the twin towers. The problem is it's actually sitting on top of WTC5. Are we supposed to believe that it somehow, like the passport and bandana, miraculously survived the fire that melted enough steel to bring down the tower it crashed into and then lobbed perfectly onto WTC5's roof while the rest of the tower and its contents were pulverised into dust?

Still harping on the upside down book huh? How predictable.

 

[KnightersRevenge]

Not to mention that not one of the four FDR's from the four hijacked planes was recovered. Seriously.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/index.htm

The website contains links to a set of documents surrounding 911, please note:

"Document 4: NTSB report, "Specialist's Factual Report of Investigation-Digital Flight Data Recorder" for United Airlines Flight 93, Feb. 15, 2002 [Chapter 1, The 9/11 Commission Report, "We Have Some Planes." Footnotes 70, 71]"

 

[Baloo]

That, as far as I know, is the only photo of passenger jet wreckage ever found at the twin towers. The problem is it's actually sitting on top of WTC5. Are we supposed to believe that it somehow, like the passport and bandana, miraculously survived the fire that melted enough steel to bring down the tower it crashed into and then lobbed perfectly onto WTC5's roof while the rest of the tower and its contents were pulverised into dust?

Still harping on the upside down book huh? How predictable.

No, what's predictable is your retort every time posts something that backs the official version and makes a mockery of a conspiracy fact with some weird assertion that its more likely to be part of the plant to cover the conspiracy that the US Government, GOD, global news agencies and GOD knows who, manufactured the WTC event.

Of course there is no proof and the reason to do something like that is yet to be proven but its the more likely then the accepted facts.

You still don't see the parallels with ID ?

 

[KnightersRevenge]

No, what's predictable is your retort every time posts something that backs the official version and makes a mockery of a conspiracy fact with some weird assertion that its more likely to be part of the plant to cover the conspiracy that the US Government, GOD, global news agencies and GOD knows who, manufactured the WTC event.

Of course there is no proof and the reason to do something like that is yet to be proven but its the more likely then the accepted facts.

You still don't see the parallels with ID ?

I honestly don't understand the reticence to accept the debunking information in favour of breathless hysteria-mongering. So the plane did have windows, the firefighters were "pulled" from the building rather than an order given to "pull" the building, it wasn't an "office fire" half the building was gouged out and on fire for 7 hours, Bush is incompetent and tried to cover his tracks - quick call the newspapers that's an exclusive!

 

[tigertim]

Oh, by the way. London Tube bombing in 2005 was a hoax too!


http://www.takeourworldback.com/77suicidebombershoax/

Seriously where does it end.

And what other terrorist attacks were hoaxes? Or is it just the big bad Yankees that perpetrate these hoaxes? I assume these ones aren't worth following up to find all of the "doubts" about lack of clear footage or corrupt governments covering up. Nah, just go the "big one" because that,ll look impressive. Same with Elvis. Notice no one comes up with "sighting" of for eg The lead singer of the Knack? Because its not "big" enough. The conspiracy theorist has to have the "big one" because its more sensationalist. It shows at "they" are smarter than everyone else, that "they" are "clever" enough to see the "truth"


I can quite easily start a conspiracy theory on just about any topic. It's very easy. I could be offensive and outlandish enough to start one on the Black Saturday bush fires of 2009 in VIctoria. "It was a conspiracy between the LAbour government, the Victorian chief of police and the CFA to decimate the insurance companies so that e state government could start their own insurance firm and corner the market. There was billions to be made. It was also a way to engender community spirit never seen before by Victorians. Notice how police chief ate dinner at that North Melbourne pub whilst the fires burned. Huh mmm, a little too coincidental really..... The man arrested and prosecuted (BRendan SOkaluk) over some of the fires was a former CFA member! Another "coincidence". Not ONE of the recommendations by the inquest have been acted upon by the state government!"

 

[U2Tigers]

Oh, by the way. London Tube bombing in 2005 was a hoax too!


http://www.takeourworldback.com/77suicidebombershoax/

Seriously where does it end.

And what other terrorist attacks were hoaxes? Or is it just the big bad Yankees that perpetrate these hoaxes? I assume these ones aren't worth following up to find all of the "doubts" about lack of clear footage or corrupt governments covering up. Nah, just go the "big one" because that,ll look impressive. Same with Elvis. Notice no one comes up with "sighting" of for eg The lead singer of the Knack? Because its not "big" enough. The conspiracy theorist has to have the "big one" because its more sensationalist. It shows at "they" are smarter than everyone else, that "they" are "clever" enough to see the "truth"


I can quite easily start a conspiracy theory on just about any topic. It's very easy. I could be offensive and outlandish enough to start one on the Black Saturday bush fires of 2009 in VIctoria. "It was a conspiracy between the LAbour government, the Victorian chief of police and the CFA to decimate the insurance companies so that e state government could start their own insurance firm and corner the market. There was billions to be made. It was also a way to engender community spirit never seen before by Victorians. Notice how police chief ate dinner at that North Melbourne pub whilst the fires burned. Huh mmm, a little too coincidental really..... The man arrested and prosecuted (BRendan SOkaluk) over some of the fires was a former CFA member! Another "coincidence". Not ONE of the recommendations by the inquest have been acted upon by the state government!"

Holy cow I always thought Labour Governments were dodgy. :hihi

 

[tigertim]

This stuff blows my mind. I keep reading more and more hysteria. There's a conspiracy theory that the "witnesses
Of 911 "truth" have been murdered to keep them quiet. (Even though they have died many, many years later! But that's typical government workers for you! Take forever to do anything!)

I watched some footage of this Barry Jennings, as far as I heard he heard explosions. Yep, fire and avgas will do that! Of course his companion on that day, Hess, well, who cars what he says. He was in on it all!

 

[Baloo]

This stuff blows my mind. I keep reading more and more hysteria. There's a conspiracy theory that the "witnesses
Of 911 "truth" have been murdered to keep them quiet. (Even though they have died many, many years later! But that's typical government workers for you! Take forever to do anything!)

I watched some footage of this Barry Jennings, as far as I heard he heard explosions. Yep, fire and avgas will do that! Of course his companion on that day, Hess, well, who cars what he says. He was in on it all!

Finding a photo of the plane that hit the 2nd tower was tough. Most sites I found detailed proof of how there was no second plane but a secret military hologram that was timed to appear when the explosives in the building were set top go off.