PDA

View Full Version : Discuss 9/11 debate



jimnyc
10-11-2007, 07:47 PM
The debate between Sertes and myself is now complete. Feel free to discuss the debate here if you wish or ask any questions. Hope you all had fun reading it!

Kathianne
10-11-2007, 08:42 PM
The debate between Sertes and myself is now complete. Feel free to discuss the debate here if you wish or ask any questions. Hope you all had fun reading it!

I must say, the two ongoing debates have been very interesting. I think Sertes did the best he could, considering the stance. Jim won, but had way more to do with the fact of positives overcoming negatives. Conspiracies just don't cut it for me, especially when we are speaking of 'thousands' possibly involved. Face it, some ideologues would just have to 'spill the beans.'

Gaffer
10-11-2007, 09:03 PM
I have never bought into the conspiracy theory on this. There were too many clinton hold overs in the Bush administration for any of this to go on without it being exposed by someone. Not to mention anyone with a bit of common sense would be able to see what happened.

Abbey
10-11-2007, 09:06 PM
I guess the most interesting issue for me is why someone is likely to believe something like this could be conspiracy-driven.

mrg666
10-11-2007, 09:14 PM
I guess the most interesting issue for me is why someone is likely to believe something like this could be conspiracy-driven.

and the folk who believe this cant say why it would be a conspiracy . what would be the gains ( apart from inciting hatred and distrust that allready exsists )
what would be so valuable that countered being caught out to make it worth losing everything something that would belittle even watergate that would result in trials not seen since nuremburg .
im curious all you with these theories must have an idea as to why

Gaffer
10-11-2007, 10:16 PM
and the folk who believe this cant say why it would be a conspiracy . what would be the gains ( apart from inciting hatred and distrust that allready exsists )
what would be so valuable that countered being caught out to make it worth losing everything something that would belittle even watergate that would result in trials not seen since nuremburg .
im curious all you with these theories must have an idea as to why

I've asked the same question. Never got an answer.

darin
10-11-2007, 11:20 PM
Yeah - I greatly appreciate the effort behind the 'it was an inside job' debater...but geesh...some of the things he stated as fact were WAY beyond the scope of my 'common sense' radar. :)

Sertes
10-18-2007, 10:02 AM
I've asked the same question. Never got an answer.

Well, I answered you, quoting you, in the thread where you made the question.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=137708&postcount=7

I can copy the answer here, if you want to discuss it here.

Gaffer
10-18-2007, 09:38 PM
Well, I answered you, quoting you, in the thread where you made the question.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=137708&postcount=7

I can copy the answer here, if you want to discuss it here.

That didn't answer the question. What would the government gain by blowing up the WTC and the pentagon? We have been continually closing bases every year all around the world. we have enough bases to project military force anywhere in the world. We have 12 carrier groups that can go anywhere they are needed. What do bases have to do with the WTC attack? We also have bases in Turkey and Kuwait.

The NYT is a commie rag with no credibility so its best to find other sources.

Sertes
10-19-2007, 06:43 AM
That didn't answer the question. What would the government gain by blowing up the WTC and the pentagon? We have been continually closing bases every year all around the world. we have enough bases to project military force anywhere in the world. We have 12 carrier groups that can go anywhere they are needed. What do bases have to do with the WTC attack? We also have bases in Turkey and Kuwait.

The NYT is a commie rag with no credibility so its best to find other sources.

No, that was the answer, I can explain my point of view further because again the single points you name are true, but we disagree on the bigger picture, to me those elements mean something else.
It's true you are closing bases around the world, but you're also opening them. You're moving the bases further away, a process that started with the fall the wall, you're closing bases in Germany (or threatening to do so, as Germany is somewhat economically dependant from them) to move them closer to Russia, for example. The missile shield location is closer, and a missile shield against nuclear ICBM that is causing so much strife is not built to protect from terrorists.
You should review Neocon's Project for a New American Century (PNAC), and a plan called Rebuilding American Defenses.
They call for an upgrading of US military, they state there's need for a continued presence of US army in the middle east to control a resources-critical region.
You say you're closing bases, of course! You have moved and deployed more than a hundred thousand soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan! And we all know where they're heading to...

So going back, what gave US the justification for invading sovereign nations like Iraq and Afghanistan, which never were a threat to the US? 9/11.
Us stated they indeed posed a clear and present danger or would become one really soon.
So 9/11 paved the way for the Cheney doctrine, the self-appointed right to retaliate anywhere anyhow because you were allegedly attacked by terrorists.
Before 9/11 that wouldn't have been possible.

As Section V of Rebuilding American Defense, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", tells us:

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor"

Sertes
10-19-2007, 12:30 PM
I must say, the two ongoing debates have been very interesting. I think Sertes did the best he could, considering the stance. Jim won, but had way more to do with the fact of positives overcoming negatives. Conspiracies just don't cut it for me, especially when we are speaking of 'thousands' possibly involved. Face it, some ideologues would just have to 'spill the beans.'

The numbers sum up to 200, I explained it in the thread.

When asking Jimnyc how many kept the secret on the Manhattan Project he said 130,000

And if you don't believe that false-flag plans are made that predict to use 200 participants that would have to keep their mouth shut forever, look for Operation Northwoods. I covered it too, in the thread.

Kathianne
11-24-2007, 11:37 AM
Now this is scary, the moonbats are in the majority. :tinfoil:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11242007/news/nationalnews/blame_u_s__for_9_11_idiots_in_majority_318165.htm



'BLAME U.S. FOR 9/11' IDIOTS IN MAJORITY
'PLOTS' THICKEN IN SHOCKING POLL
By ANDY SOLTIS


November 24, 2007 -- Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the federal government had warnings about 9/11 but decided to ignore them, a national survey found.

And that's not the only conspiracy theory with a huge number of true believers in the United States.

The poll found that more than one out of three Americans believe Washington is concealing the truth about UFOs and the Kennedy assassination - and most everyone is sure the rise in gas prices is one vast oil-industry conspiracy.

Sixty-two percent of those polled thought it was "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials turned a blind eye to specific warnings of the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Only 30 percent said the 9/11 theory was "not likely," according to the Scripps Howard/Ohio University poll...

Sertes
11-24-2007, 01:02 PM
Now this is scary, the moonbats are in the majority. :tinfoil:


Ask yourself why you dismiss the Inside Job from the start on without looking to eventual evidence.



[Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the federal government had warnings about 9/11 but decided to ignore them, a national survey found.

That's the LIHOP (Let It Happen On Purpose), as opposed to MIHOP (Made It Happen On Purpose).
The fact the three 9/11 "collapses" have more than ten points in common with controlled demolitions while showing none of the elements of gravitational collapses demostrates planning that won't happen with the LIHOP theory. But that's a start.

(this claim is made by more than 200 real life architects and engineers, all listed with name, surname and qualify here: http://www.ae911truth.org)

jimnyc
11-24-2007, 04:13 PM
Aggggghhhhhhhh crap! Now we have to listen to this twit rant in this thread too?

jimnyc
11-24-2007, 04:31 PM
Here's some funny reading, one of the other twits that Sertes masturbates too claims that the Oklahoma bombing was fake too, and that it was likely a "mini nuke" that caused the destruction. Lots of other fun reading from some guys in the field over at this thread while they laugh at the "truthers"

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=84412

Kathianne
11-24-2007, 04:41 PM
Here's some funny reading, one of the other twits that Sertes masturbates too claims that the Oklahoma bombing was fake too, and that it was likely a "mini nuke" that caused the destruction. Lots of other fun reading from some guys in the field over at this thread while they laugh at the "truthers"

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=84412

Thanks for that link, too funny! Is Sertes on there? I'm going to look. :coffee:

Kathianne
11-24-2007, 04:49 PM
I find him here (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:mHhQMuWUYkwJ:www.topix.com/forum/tv/the-view/T52BV5V47PNQ6AU7G+sertes+conspiracy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a), more on WTC #7...

and

Wow, even on DIGG (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yODTsAlCWi4J:www.digg.com/videos/comedy/Bill_Maher_Takes_a_Jab_at_the_9_11_Truth_Movement% 3Ft%3D9193306+sertes+conspiracy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=20&gl=us&client=firefox-a).

jimnyc
11-24-2007, 05:16 PM
Holy crap, I just finished reading through the entire thread that I linked to. If this Plumb character even remotely holds ideas similar to others from ae911, then I would be extremely embarrassed to ever link that as anything regarding proof again! LOL This guy makes Sertes seem half normal! You have real architects and engineers posting on that site and they literally made one of Sertes' buddies look like a grammar school student!

Sertes and his conspiracies have about completely fallen apart. Too funny!

Sertes
11-25-2007, 03:55 PM
Here's some funny reading, one of the other twits that Sertes masturbates too claims that the Oklahoma bombing was fake too, and that it was likely a "mini nuke" that caused the destruction. Lots of other fun reading from some guys in the field over at this thread while they laugh at the "truthers"

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=84412

haha, do you know Friedrich Nietzsche?

He once said "The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments."

Hence the mini-nukes, the no-plane theory, the direct energy weapons... too bad you won't find any in the debate.

Sorry Jim, you cannot associate me with this kind of crap! A very low blow on your part, mister.

You'll go any lenght to avoid answering the real questions

Sertes
11-25-2007, 04:03 PM
I find him here (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:mHhQMuWUYkwJ:www.topix.com/forum/tv/the-view/T52BV5V47PNQ6AU7G+sertes+conspiracy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a), more on WTC #7...

and

Wow, even on DIGG (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yODTsAlCWi4J:www.digg.com/videos/comedy/Bill_Maher_Takes_a_Jab_at_the_9_11_Truth_Movement% 3Ft%3D9193306+sertes+conspiracy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=20&gl=us&client=firefox-a).

Mineta deposition & Collapses on Anothersite
http://forum.anothersite.co.uk/showpost.php?p=3188574&postcount=1146
http://forum.anothersite.co.uk/showpost.php?p=3188570&postcount=1147
http://forum.anothersite.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2704334&postcount=250

Yes, people didn't have a clue over there, too.

jimnyc
11-25-2007, 04:54 PM
Sorry Jim, you cannot associate me with this kind of crap! A very low blow on your part, mister.

You'll go any lenght to avoid answering the real questions

Hey, pinhead, you associated yourself with idiots like that! You must have brought up ae911.org at least 100x so far since you've been a member here! Now you wanna backpedal a little when it's shown that the people that are a part of that group are outright idiots just like yourself! Put up against other professionals and they look like total conspiracy idiots, much like yourself!

Why don't you join that forum, state your case and have a go with them in there? Link us to the thread when you get started! :laugh2:

Sertes
11-25-2007, 05:55 PM
Hey, pinhead, you associated yourself with idiots like that! You must have brought up ae911.org at least 100x so far since you've been a member here! Now you wanna backpedal a little when it's shown that the people that are a part of that group are outright idiots just like yourself! Put up against other professionals and they look like total conspiracy idiots, much like yourself!

Why don't you join that forum, state your case and have a go with them in there? Link us to the thread when you get started! :laugh2:

A random mail quoting a random member of ae911truth.org and attributing him some idiot claim is a little low on my interest.

Why don't you comment their HOME PAGE, where THEY MAKE THEIR REAL CLAIMS?

jimnyc
11-25-2007, 06:02 PM
A random mail quoting a random member of ae911truth.org and attributing him some idiot claim is a little low on my interest.

Why don't you comment their HOME PAGE, where THEY MAKE THEIR REAL CLAIMS?

A random mail? One of your esteemed buddies wrote those posts right in that very thread, dumbass! And quite a few people tried to respond directly with these idiots, only to be outright dismissed, and they closed down their forums because those in the know made them look like fools! Face it, you're been referencing a page of people that have no clue what they're talking about, and when put up against other professionals they are either made to look like idiots, or they bail and run with their tails between their legs!

So, are you going to go there and prove to them that the official story is a lie? And if not, why not? Are you afraid of holding your evidence up directly to those with better knowledge than all of us combined? You seem to have it all figured out, it should be a piece of cake for you to just copy n paste some of your theories. I'll laugh my fucking ass off when I read them picking your retarded theories apart! :laugh2:

Sertes
11-26-2007, 03:07 AM
A random mail? One of your esteemed buddies wrote those posts right in that very thread, dumbass! And quite a few people tried to respond directly with these idiots, only to be outright dismissed, and they closed down their forums because those in the know made them look like fools! Face it, you're been referencing a page of people that have no clue what they're talking about, and when put up against other professionals they are either made to look like idiots, or they bail and run with their tails between their legs!


FYI two months ago ae911truth along with other members of the 9/11 truth movement presented their findings directly to NIST. You know, NIST is a lot better than a random engineer in a random website that knows no better than insult those seeking answers.

So NIST answered with a letter, in which we find the "astonishing" revelation we all know about since they pubilshed their study: their study is a pre-collapse study, because they examined and explained the hits on the towers, the fires, the structural failure, and they stop there, they cannot account for all the evidence ae911truth.org found ON THE COLLAPSE ITSELF.

http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/news/library/nist5-o.gif

http://www.luogocomune.net/site/modules/news/library/nist4b-o.gif



So, are you going to go there and prove to them that the official story is a lie? And if not, why not? Are you afraid of holding your evidence up directly to those with better knowledge than all of us combined? You seem to have it all figured out, it should be a piece of cake for you to just copy n paste some of your theories. I'll laugh my fucking ass off when I read them picking your retarded theories apart! :laugh2:

Well, you hope maybe they'll have the answers you lack.
You hope your faith is well placed, since you cannot figure things out and are starting question your blind beliefs.
Ok, let's see how they respond on my questions, if they discuss the message or simply insult the messenger

jimnyc
11-26-2007, 05:33 AM
Well, you hope maybe they'll have the answers you lack.
You hope your faith is well placed, since you cannot figure things out and are starting question your blind beliefs.
Ok, let's see how they respond on my questions, if they discuss the message or simply insult the messenger

Every one of your theories has been made out to look like nonsense on this board, EVERY ONE OF THEM. You choose to ignore some of the answers, and not accept others, but that doesn't matter to people with an IQ above that of a cigarette butt. And make no bones about it, they WILL insult your stupid little ass after they make a mockery of your so called "facts" that the 9/11 story is a lie. But do post a link here for us once you've started so we can all share in your embarrassment! :laugh2:

Sertes
11-26-2007, 06:04 AM
Every one of your theories has been made out to look like nonsense on this board, EVERY ONE OF THEM. You choose to ignore some of the answers, and not accept others, but that doesn't matter to people with an IQ above that of a cigarette butt. And make no bones about it, they WILL insult your stupid little ass after they make a mockery of your so called "facts" that the 9/11 story is a lie. But do post a link here for us once you've started so we can all share in your embarrassment! :laugh2:

I'm not here to embarass you, but there are many issues you failed to answer to, even the one that require no technical expertise but only an opinion, you failed as well on Mineta deposition
From someone owning a site on political debate I expected more.

Fact: Mineta deposition contradicts 9/11 commission report.

Your opinion?

Kathianne
11-26-2007, 06:06 AM
I'm not here to embarass you, but there are many issues you failed to answer to, even the one that require no technical expertise but only an opinion, you failed as well on Mineta deposition
From someone owning a site on political debate I expected more.

Fact: Mineta deposition contradicts 9/11 commission report.

Your opinion?

He didn't fail to answer, you fail to recognize answers when you see them. As for responding to anything else, no.

Sertes
11-26-2007, 06:16 AM
He didn't fail to answer, you fail to recognize answers when you see them. As for responding to anything else, no.

Then if it's true be kind and link his answer for me. If it exists.

Or post yours, it's an open forum after all.

jimnyc
11-26-2007, 06:26 AM
I'm not here to embarass you, but there are many issues you failed to answer to, even the one that require no technical expertise but only an opinion, you failed as well on Mineta deposition
From someone owning a site on political debate I expected more.

Fact: Mineta deposition contradicts 9/11 commission report.

Your opinion?


Then if it's true be kind and link his answer for me. If it exists.

Or post yours, it's an open forum after all.

Are you stating for the record that I never addressed your question about the Mineta deposition? If I can produce a link to where I addressed it, will you disappear into other threads and stop with your repetitive garbage?

ALL of your questions have been answered, and now I'm being repetitive. You just either don't accept them, don't like them or dismiss them. That's not my problem.

Sertes
11-26-2007, 10:58 AM
Are you stating for the record that I never addressed your question about the Mineta deposition? If I can produce a link to where I addressed it, will you disappear into other threads and stop with your repetitive garbage?

ALL of your questions have been answered, and now I'm being repetitive. You just either don't accept them, don't like them or dismiss them. That's not my problem.

You didn't answer to the question "which one is lying, Mineta or the 9/11 commission?"

You once produced a link to address Mineta deposition and never acknowledged my many follow'ups (as always), in another post you claimed that the matter wasn't important anyway, that if we solve it we would be back on square one.

These are not answers to the question. These are mystifications of one of the most important issues on 9/11. In the debate you posted a direct link of 9/11 commission report: it clearly saves Cheney ass. I posted the REAL Norman Mineta deposition before 9/11 commission. It tells us just the opposite

So again:

"Was 9/11 commission report made to save Cheney ass, or is Norman Mineta lying under oath"??

See? No technical expertise needed, only the gut to open eyes is needed

jimnyc
11-26-2007, 11:08 AM
You didn't answer to the question "which one is lying, Mineta or the 9/11 commission?"

Because your determination that either one of them lied is lacking any proof whatsoever. There were lots of things miscommunicated that day and lots of things that might never be answered to your satisfaction, but that by no means equates to lies, cover-ups or conspiracies.

You are just a Class A loser idiot. You repeat the same garbage over and over that has been debunked hundreds of times on thousands of sites. Yet you stick to it and whine like a little bitch that you are right and everyone is ignoring you.

Since you obviously refuse to acknowledge your questions have been answered, I will become repetitive once again - kindly go fuck your shitty italian self. :fu:

Sertes
11-26-2007, 12:32 PM
Because your determination that either one of them lied is lacking any proof whatsoever. There were lots of things miscommunicated that day and lots of things that might never be answered to your satisfaction, but that by no means equates to lies, cover-ups or conspiracies.

You are just a Class A loser idiot. You repeat the same garbage over and over that has been debunked hundreds of times on thousands of sites. Yet you stick to it and whine like a little bitch that you are right and everyone is ignoring you.

Since you obviously refuse to acknowledge your questions have been answered, I will become repetitive once again - kindly go fuck your shitty italian self. :fu:

Wow! All it takes is a "Class A loser idiot" with a direct question to make you yell insults with hands on your ears, like a baby, pretending not to hear.

Too bad Cheney was either inside or outside the bunker, he was either aware or unaware of the pentagon plane, either Mineta lied under oath or the 9/11 commission report is made to cover Cheney ass. You cannot have it both ways. And you do a service to your country by accepting one of the versions, even if it's the opposite of the one I choose, or by finding a third one.

Instead by evading issues you just prove my point, that FAITH IS STRONGER THAN EVIDENCE.

And if you're ruled by FAITH, there's no amount of EVIDENCE I can show you. Even the real video of the real deposition from a minister of the United States won't be enough:

M3q0uZAEd5w

from the official 9/11 Commission report:


American 77 began turning south, away from the White House, at 9:34. It
continued heading south for roughly a minute,before turning west and begin¬
ning to circle back.This news prompted the Secret Service to order the imme¬
diate evacuation of the Vice President just before 9:36. Agents propelled him
________________________________________
Page 40
40
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
out of his chair and told him he had to get to the bunker.The Vice President
entered the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37.


source: http://64.233.167.104/custom?q=cache:sHwgJh0-VxAJ:www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec1.pdf+dick+cheney+9:30&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=pub-0982790381073093

jimnyc
11-26-2007, 02:59 PM
Thread moved as it is obviously no longer specifically discussing the debate.

jimnyc
11-26-2007, 03:01 PM
Wow! All it takes....(snipped) ...

Allow me to repeat myself:

You are just a Class A loser idiot. You repeat the same garbage over and over that has been debunked hundreds of times on thousands of sites. Yet you stick to it and whine like a little bitch that you are right and everyone is ignoring you.

Since you obviously refuse to acknowledge your questions have been answered, I will become repetitive once again - kindly go fuck your shitty italian self. :fu:

Sertes
11-26-2007, 05:36 PM
Allow me to repeat myself:

You are just a Class A loser idiot. You repeat the same garbage over and over that has been debunked hundreds of times on thousands of sites. Yet you stick to it and whine like a little bitch that you are right and everyone is ignoring you.

Since you obviously refuse to acknowledge your questions have been answered, I will become repetitive once again - kindly go fuck your shitty italian self. :fu:

It's strange that you don't repeat your answer on where was Dick Cheney at 9:30, instead. It should be easy, right? This way it looks like you provided none.

Poor JimNeocon, let me tell you remind the news on the couple you're so badly defending from last month:

Donald Rumsfeld had to flee France (France!!) to evade a lawsuit for torture. He ran with tail between its legs from frenchmen!

Dick Cheney has been the target of Kuchinich impeachment resolution that accuse him of forging the WMD claims amony many other misdemeanors.

So these charges are like getting Al Capone for tax evading, but are better than sitting before a TV set watching propaganda and doing nothing.
They still have to answer on what they did on 9/11. Guess why you cannot counter Mineta video deposition with Cheney video deposition? Because he refused to make it, and they simply let him.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/white_house/jan-june04/9-11_4-29.html

It is about time you wake up Jim, these people don't deserve your efforts nor your blind support.

jimnyc
11-26-2007, 05:40 PM
I'll repeat myself once again for the stupid little italian boy:

You are just a Class A loser idiot. You repeat the same garbage over and over that has been debunked hundreds of times on thousands of sites. Yet you stick to it and whine like a little bitch that you are right and everyone is ignoring you.

Since you obviously refuse to acknowledge your questions have been answered, I will become repetitive once again - kindly go fuck your shitty italian self. :fu:

Sertes
11-27-2007, 07:55 AM
You repeat the same garbage over and over that has been debunked hundreds of times on thousands of sites.

That's why you don't answer. You delegate your critical thinking to someone else. To a link.

jimnyc
11-27-2007, 07:57 AM
Shut up, little meatball. Kindly go fuck yourself.

Sertes
11-27-2007, 09:28 AM
Shut up, little meatball. Kindly go fuck yourself.

That's the kind of discussion someone wants: If the question is disturbing, a taser shot. Perfectly in line with the first emendament.

If someone else can figure where was Dick Cheney at 9:30 on 9/11/2001 I'm open for debate.

jimnyc
11-27-2007, 09:42 AM
What's an "emendament"? And aren't you supposed to be off somewhere with your retarded conspiracies fucking yourself?

Sertes
11-28-2007, 09:40 AM
What's an "emendament"? And aren't you supposed to be off somewhere with your retarded conspiracies fucking yourself?

My fault, maybe we can write italian and see if in an hundred posts you never do a typo.

Ready to answer the issue, now? Where was Dick Cheney at 9:30 on 9/11/2001?

jimnyc
11-28-2007, 09:48 AM
Ready to go fuck yourself yet? All of your questions have been answered. So kindly shove your regurgitated nonsense up your spaghetti filled ass.

chesswarsnow
11-28-2007, 10:16 AM
Sorry bout that,




My fault, maybe we can write italian and see if in an hundred posts you never do a typo.

Ready to answer the issue, now? Where was Dick Cheney at 9:30 on 9/11/2001?



1. Let me answer this one Jimmy.
2. Cheney was in a safe place.
3. What the hell would it matter where Cheney was?
4. Do you think he was on top of one of the *TWIN TOWERS*, directing the whole *ATTACK*?
5. This ought to be funny.:laugh2:

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

Sertes
11-28-2007, 10:26 AM
Ready to go fuck yourself yet? All of your questions have been answered. So kindly shove your regurgitated nonsense up your spaghetti filled ass.

I really think you need to step back for a second an watch this whole page.
Then try to make some sense out of what you wrote, and from the fact you're trying to hide this thread and not providing answers to the bigger issues.
Are you really so arrogant that you cannot stand to be proved wrong?
(you even won the debate, didn't you?)

Where was Dick Cheney at 9:30 on 9/11? Post your answer again, or link it here.

The whole point of a conspiracy theory section is to discuss conspiracy theories, isn't it?

jimnyc
11-28-2007, 10:28 AM
Shut up, stupid pepperoni boy. Your questions have been answered. Don't like them? Too bad, go fuck yourself. Can't find them? Too bad, search harder, then go fuck yourself.

Sertes
11-28-2007, 10:36 AM
3. What the hell would it matter where Cheney was?


After the second hit on the towers it was clear to everyone that america was under attack and they were using airplanes as weapons.
AA77 (the pentagon plane) allegedly was able to fly for 20 minutes toward the most heavily defended airspace in the world, coming straight to washington d.c. , hitting the pentagon, while everyone was looking out for planes as threats.

For the missed intervention we have 2 opposite versions:

Official version
The 9/11 commission report places him outside the white house bunker, inaware of AA77 position, bearing, it also states he entered the white house bunker (PEOC) at 9:37, just moments before the plane hit.



American 77 began turning south, away from the White House, at 9:34. It
continued heading south for roughly a minute,before turning west and begin¬
ning to circle back.This news prompted the Secret Service to order the imme¬
diate evacuation of the Vice President just before 9:36. Agents propelled him
________________________________________
Page 40
40
THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
out of his chair and told him he had to get to the bunker.The Vice President
entered the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37.
Source: http://64.233.167.104/custom?q=cache:sHwgJh0-VxAJ:www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/sec1.pdf+dick+cheney+9:30&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=pub-0982790381073093

Norman Mineta deposition
Norman Mineta, minister of transportation, in a testimony under oath before the 9/11 commission:

M3q0uZAEd5w

He is into Whiteouse PEOC, he’s already in phone contact FAA number two in command, which is following the unidentified target in its trajectory toward the capital.
A young man enters the bunker to inform Cheney that the plane was 50 miles out, it's 9:25
At Langley, 105 miles away, Brad Derrig and Dean Eckmann got the order to scramble and will effectively be airborne at 9:30.
We have a target followed on radar, vice president knows that, and military fighters are in flight.
F16 flies at 1500 mph, even at half speed they could have intercepted the plane.
All conditions to down the plane and defend Washington D.C. are effective, if indeed the order was a “shoot down order”
But the plane comes to 30 miles, and the young man reports it to Cheney. Then it comes to 10, and the young man asks Dick Cheney “do the order still stand?” He snaps back “Of course the order still stands, have you heard anything on the contrary?”
Then the plane hits the pentagon.

If you think he mistook AA77 with UA93 you may watch this interview:
edDExK8PpWs
where he provided landmarks names:

http://i18.tinypic.com/6c5i2c2.jpg
Green: great falls park.
Upper yellow: Rosslyn
Lower yellow: National Airport
Red: the pentagon

A detail of the area between Rosslyn and the National Airport:
http://i14.tinypic.com/2rc49s0.jpg
Where I debated this: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=137692&postcount=20

Coincidences
1) The PEOC access control computer broke down, so there's no corroborating evidence.
2) Mineta deposition is reported on 9/11 commission report, but the part I reported here is omitted (the part where the young man comes out to inform the vice president of the wereabouts of flight 77)

---

So why is so important to know where was Dick Cheney at 9:30?

First of all because it shows that either:
or Norman Mineta, minister of transportation, lied under oath
or the 9/11 Commission Report is wrong on purpose, to cover up for Dick Cheney

And most important, we should connect it with the whole missed intervention part:

At 9:30 in Langley, 105 miles away, Brad Derrig and Dean Eckmann got the order to scramble and will effectively be airborne at 9:30.
So we have a target followed on radar, vice president knows that, and military fighters are in flight.
F16 flies at 1500 mph, even at half speed they could have intercepted the plane in time
There was an ongoing order by the only one in command, the VP.
All conditions to down the plane and defend Washington D.C. are effective, if indeed the order was a “shoot down order”

It didn't happen.

rppearso
01-27-2008, 09:56 PM
I think people need to watch Zeitgeist (of course the whole first part on religion is a sham) but the points on 9/11 and all wars before since WW2 it kinda makes you think, 9/11 was the final push to get the anti terror bill passed that has potential to almost completely disolve our constitutional rights it also got us involved in the middle east more so that we have ever been before and is it a coincidence that this all happened right before oil went to 100$ a barrel. Alot of this is no surprise considering it is lined out in revalations as we are potentially entering the armagedon, the armagedon will occure in the middle east. There is sometimes deception sprinkled into truth but we must be able to discern the deception and not allow others to use deceptive points to cloud the truth, oklahoma city was encoruaged by the government in attempts to pass the terror bill, the mini nuke thing is a deception designed to discredit the entire theroy by making it look silly.

atliberty
03-23-2008, 10:22 PM
The truth shall set you free and it can be seen before your very eyes here: http://www.911blogger.com/node/10025 an/or here: http://blip.tv/file/306082/ ; the second site video feed can be viewed in full screen mode.

We need to spread the truth that people inside our own government knew about and planned 9/11. All as Bush and Cheney had to do was be complacent, which we know is conspiracy. We know they did it to justify and scare a majority of us into supporting their quest for global conquest, domination and profit to a small group of people who drink the blood of innocent people.


Just like the Manhattan project, 9/11 was not planned in the White House. In the case of 9/11 it was just okayed by the criminal figure heads there. There is no question as to whether or not the system can hide such a covert project from the honorable soldiers.

All that the good soldiers believe in and are willing to fight for remain even after they realize that they have been tricked and lied to.
In fact they take an oath to defend the constitution, not to defend the people who have used lies to make obscene profits from war and oil.

While I have been trained in engineering, it does not take an engineer to realize the planes did not cause the buildings to crumble to the ground. Even as I watched the buildings fall in 2001, I knew that they were brought down by explosives. Once the one tower leaned to the side, there was no downward force on the opposite side from which it was leaning; it would not have continued to collapse symmetrically.

Please, if you still doubt that 9/11 was a false flag operation, watch the movie. Then tell everyone you know that it is true that people inside our own government had to be involved in the planning of 9/11. This is the only way we proud honorable Americans can reclaim our stature and righteousness as a nation.

Thank you

manu1959
03-26-2008, 12:54 PM
how do you know that the order he is refering to is a shoot down order.....

how do you know which plane the solider is refering to is the plane that hit the pentagon.......

but wait a second.....your assertion is that an airplane did not hit the pentagon.....as an airplane can not make a circular hole....and untrained pilot could not make the turn necessary to hit the building....the engine found at the site was the wrong engine.....there was no debris....no bodies.....

esentially no ariplane......

therefore, if there was no plane 10 miles out and thus no shoot down order

no conspiracy ...... not by dick anyway...

now what were the clinton appointed terror experts up to that day tenant and clarke....you know the two guys that got "hit" 1/2 a dozen times.....

how about this.....

were the towers even hit by planes......

one other thing....who appointed norm .....

Sertes
03-26-2008, 01:23 PM
how do you know that the order he is refering to is a shoot down order.....

In fact it appears it was a "stand down order" rather than a "shoot down order", judging on what happened



how do you know which plane the solider is refering to is the plane that hit the pentagon.......


Because the young man told Cheney "the plane is 50 miles out", "the plane is 30 miles out" and later "the plane is 10 miles out"... out of what???
the two planes already hit the towers
after the third message the pentagon was hit
the peoc is under the white house, washington d.c.
the fourth plane was crashed one hour later (and by passengers, so "the plane is x miles out" would mean nothing referring to UA93)



but wait a second.....your assertion is that an airplane did not hit the pentagon.....as an airplane can not make a circular hole....and untrained pilot could not make the turn necessary to hit the building....the engine found at the site was the wrong engine.....there was no debris....no bodies.....

esentially no ariplane......

therefore, if there was no plane 10 miles out and thus no shoot down order

no conspiracy ...... not by dick anyway...


True. The facts are more complicated.
But you're using side issues here to dodge the main question: WHERE WAS DICK CHENEY AT 9:30 ON 9/11

What we're talking about if you cannot even make sense between a selected page on 9/11 commission report and a testimony under oath of a U.S. minister?



now what were the clinton appointed terror experts up to that day tenant and clarke....you know the two guys that got "hit" 1/2 a dozen times.....

how about this.....

were the towers even hit by planes......

one other thing....who appointed norm .....

...who cares? I'm looking to the man WHO WAS IN CHARGE AT THE MOMENT.
You know, military response is top-down. Soldiers follow orders.

manu1959
03-26-2008, 05:35 PM
In fact it appears it was a "stand down order" rather than a "shoot down order", judging on what happened

Because the young man told Cheney "the plane is 50 miles out", "the plane is 30 miles out" and later "the plane is 10 miles out"... out of what???
the two planes already hit the towers
after the third message the pentagon was hit
the peoc is under the white house, washington d.c.
the fourth plane was crashed one hour later (and by passengers, so "the plane is x miles out" would mean nothing referring to UA93)

True. The facts are more complicated.
But you're using side issues here to dodge the main question: WHERE WAS DICK CHENEY AT 9:30 ON 9/11

What we're talking about if you cannot even make sense between a selected page on 9/11 commission report and a testimony under oath of a U.S. minister?

...who cares? I'm looking to the man WHO WAS IN CHARGE AT THE MOMENT.
You know, military response is top-down. Soldiers follow orders.

if a plane did not hit the pentagon then what plane could the have been speaking about......maybe his orders were....clinton is still in charge and calling the shots......

maybe he was refering to fighter jets and the presidents order to shoot the plane that didn't hit the pentagon down.....

manu1959
03-26-2008, 05:47 PM
did passenger planes hit the wtc.................

Sertes
03-27-2008, 08:34 AM
if a plane did not hit the pentagon then what plane could the have been speaking about......maybe his orders were....clinton is still in charge and calling the shots......

Everyone recognizes that some kind of plane or cruise missile hit the pentagon. But we're discussing why it wasn't intercepted... the nature of the plane is of no concern at this point. If we cannot even clear the major point in the 9/11 inquiry why look at the details?

According to Mineta testimony under oath the flight that hit the pentagon was tracked live by both military and civil radars, the VP knew that, and we know for sure there were jetfighters in air within intercepting range at 9:30, all after two hits on the towers, when it was clear to anyone the U.S. were under attack. So how in hell a commercial plane could hit the pentagon? Why the V.P. didn't take action? And why the 9/11 commission report lied about it, and covered it up?

Or else... why Norman Mineta, then minister of transportation, lied under oath before the 9/11 commission, and his testimony is missing from the thousand pages of the 9/11 commission report?

I'm just asking who was in command, why he didn't acknowledge he failed, and why he wasn't asked to respond for it before a court. And why either way the 9/11 commission report is missing or misleading.


maybe he was refering to fighter jets and the presidents order to shoot the plane that didn't hit the pentagon down.....

That's why I said 9:30 . After the three "the plane is 50 miles out", "the plane is 30 miles out", "the plane is 10 miles out" we have the hit on the pentagon, that was at 9:37

Sertes
03-27-2008, 08:35 AM
did passenger planes hit the wtc.................

It appear so, is there any proof telling you otherwise?

n0spam4me
04-06-2008, 04:04 PM
Why did the worlds greatest military power FAIL to defend even its own HQ?

why indeed!?!?!?!

trobinett
04-06-2008, 04:11 PM
I guess the most interesting issue for me is why someone is likely to believe something like this could be conspiracy-driven.

Well, after reading through all the posts, I'd say that Abbey hit the nail on the head.

The "conspiracy" driven left ALWAYS relies on the feeling that its them against us. Not a bad platform, but one always found lacking at the end of the day.

Those that rely on such a foundation, will, in the end, come up lacking.

Such is history.:slap:

Sertes
04-07-2008, 07:41 AM
The "conspiracy" driven left ALWAYS relies on the feeling that its them against us. Not a bad platform, but one always found lacking at the end of the day.

Those that rely on such a foundation, will, in the end, come up lacking.


In fact the whole idea of the official (unproved) "islamic conspiracy against the west" is plain silly.
The day they'll show us the pentagon plane, the day they explain why the damage of its rear tail engine is not present in the first responders photo of the pentagon side, the day they'll explain the dynamic of WTC7 collapse, the day they'll explain how WTC1 and 2 could collapse at free fall speed through the path of most resistance with complete pulverization... well, that day someone could be both INFORMED and BELIEVE the official conspiracy theory.

Until then... you could only believe by FAITH or by being UNINFORMED about the real issues of 9/11.

westcoast
04-07-2008, 04:49 PM
In fact the whole idea of the official (unproved) "islamic conspiracy against the west" is plain silly.
The day they'll show us the pentagon plane, the day they explain why the damage of its rear tail engine is not present in the first responders photo of the pentagon side, the day they'll explain the dynamic of WTC7 collapse, the day they'll explain how WTC1 and 2 could collapse at free fall speed through the path of most resistance with complete pulverization... well, that day someone could be both INFORMED and BELIEVE the official conspiracy theory.

Until then... you could only believe by FAITH or by being UNINFORMED about the real issues of 9/11.

Yeah, Sertes is right. You guys can't prove jack.

manu1959
04-10-2008, 08:11 PM
Yeah, Sertes is right. You guys can't prove jack.

written by a friend of mine.....

Alright so here are my biggest questions and flaws I see in your conspiracy.

PEOPLE AND HIJACKERS:
1. Where are all of the people who were on those planes? I mean the widows and orphans are lying also? (One of the widows lives a city away from me and has not seen her husband since)

2. Where are the hijackers? You guys like to say they alive and well in SA... prove it... go out and take a picture or video of you asking them questions.

PENTAGON:

3. How did the debris including destroyed cars, bent light poles, AA debris and parts, smashed generators and broken down fences get planted without being seen? I mean that highway is busy as hell and people saw it happen not to mention news teams were there within minutes.

4. How come no one in the area of the pentagon claimed to have seen a missile? All at the scene claimed to have seen a large commercial airliner resembling an AA plane hit the pentagon and many others claimed to have atleaste seen a large commercial airliner in the area flying low towars the pentagon.

WTC:
5. Why do you guys think the WTC came down like a demo? Demos come down from the bottom up, highly visible, all floors are blown in order and it falls as one. The WTC came down from the impact zone, pancaked and the "SQUIBS" were seen in no particular order. So how did you morons really buy into that?

6. Why do you guys take the fire figher quotes out of context? Yes many firefighters reported hearing large cracks and explosions. However if you read the full transcripts most also point out that it sounded like or easily could have been transformers blowing up or gas lines rupturing. So why cut those parts out when presenting this?

7. Why do you guys think fire was the excuse? No report has ever said fire is what took the towers down. Fire and heat temperatures have always been just one of the many factors from that day. Among the factores were, fire, heat and severe structural damage. The building was hit buy a plane larger than what it was designed for and carrying twice as much fuel, it took out major support components.

8. Why do you think the planes that hit were not commercial airliners? As far as I have seen only one person has claimed it was a military plane and he was way up town. Thousands were there that day and saw the symbols on the side and saw the type of plane, no one said otherwise. Millions saw it on tv.... so why make this bogus claim?

9. Where is the proof of this molten steel? Okay so sure possibly there was a pool of somthing down there.... where is the picture and more importantly the proof it was steel? It very well could have been alluminum from the planes. Lets also not forget that the fires continued for weeks afterwars... the pile was like a furnace.

10. Why do you claim the evidence was shipped away so fast? It took months to recover it all and after that it was sent across the bay where it sat for months while it was combed over for human remains. This debris was not shipped of to China the next day or even month for that matter.... and certainly not all at once when it did begin to get shipped off.

STANDDOWN ORDER:
11. Why do you claim there was a standdown order? Watching the video on youtube you hear the phrase "HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY?" When Cheney says that he is replying to the question from the aid about the shootdown order. He is simply saying have you heard anything besides a shootdown order. If this standdown order was given... somthing the vice president is not in power to authorize then why were f15s scrambled already and prepared to intercept? (Someone really explain this one)

EXPERTS:
12. Why have only a few hundreds scientists/engineers/architects worldwide joined the movement and claim conspiracy? There are millions in each field. My suggestion is look up the credntials of these guys. As we have seen with Steven Jones... He has no credentials with structural engineering or earth physics... the guy studied astro physics.... That might be why the entire Engineering dept at his school went against him?

13. Why did no toher foreign intel agencies uncover the govt doing this? Certainly countries like Russia and China who would love to slander the U.S. govt are capable of finding such a plot. They would bring it to light instantly in order to destroy respect and reliance for the U.S. govt. Instead what was the chatter before 9/11? Increased terrorist chatter from Osama and point outs of a possible strike on the U.S.

14. Why has Osama never admitted he is innocent? If he is so innocent why not admit it? Instead in every video he provokes the U.S. and gives reasoning behind the attack.

15. So if this was a conspiracy I guess the Cole, Africa Embassies and WTC attack in 91 were all also conspiracies? Sorry but those were carried out by the same organization so if this was a fake as you claim then those were also because you are stating this terrorist network is basically a fake fear.

16. Why since 9/11 have several major studies been done by MIT engineering and Purdue about the WTC all come up with similar findings to the comission? These were independent studies, not paid for or funded in any way by the govt. You guys keep saying another report must be done? Well many have by independent firms and schools and they are all disagreeing with your theory.

IRAQ/AFGHANISTAN:
17. Why would the admin do 9/11 as an excuse for Iraq? Iraq focused little on terrorism and more on WMDs. There were no Iraqis on the planes that day, why plan to invade Iraq and claim terrorist ties but put no Iraqis who could then be said to have been funded by Saddam?

18. What benifit does the U.S. being in Afghanistan really play? I mean sure you can claim it gives us a base of operations over there... not really though we have military bases all over the region.

YOUR BULLSHIT:
19. So why after all of these years has not ONE person involved turned up? Certainly people have values and feeling no matter how much money they were paid. This thing would have taken thousands of people to pull off and thousands more to pay off to keep quiet. So where are they all?

20. Why after your demo theory was proved bullshit did you guys move onto, missile pod then thermite and now possibly HAARP? Why are you guys so determined to prove this conspiracy true that you simply keep going further into space for possible causes.

21. Why is there no money trail or communication trail? Yes rumsfeld presented a few days before a massive ammount of money missing from within... OVER 12 YEARS HOWEVER!!! Do not claim that money went to 9/11... that money went to a govt spending on defense that is out of control adn foreign ops and arms sales done by the CIA most likely. Did the admin use morse code? As we have seen... emails and texts are impossible to erase... they can always be found. So where are the emails from Bush to the lowest people in the plot giving orders? NOTHING IS THERE!!!

23. Why do you claim the media is so biased and corrupt? Okay so the media may not present the best stuff always... HOWEVER... What about independent journalists? The ones that uncovered... Abu-Garhib, CIA torture flights, Walter Reed, Email scandal, GITMO, BlackWater... and dozens more scandals which this admin has not been able t keep quiet... why cant these same guys seem to find anything on 9/11? NOT THERE MAYBE???

24. Why are you so bent on finding a ct that in all probibility does not exist? There are things such as genocide ocruing in this world, Global Warming should be considered for the future.... or are things like that all a huge conspiracy also?

NOTE: Organizations need to pull off plot: CIA, FBI, NSA, CONGRESS, PENTAGON, ARMY, NAVY, AIRFORCE, FDNY, NYPD, AA, UNITED, MI6, ALL FOREIGN INTEL SERVICES, DEMO CREWS, and many more I am sure I am leaving out.

Sertes
04-15-2008, 06:38 PM
I have an answer for all questions except number 22.



1. Where are all of the people who were on those planes? I mean the widows and orphans are lying also? (One of the widows lives a city away from me and has not seen her husband since)
1. No one dispute the passengers of AA77 (pentagon plane) and UA93 (fourth plane) are dead. It's how and where they died that's challenged: I believe they died in an airfield where the two planes landed, after being forced to provide phone calls that confirmed the fact "arabs hijacked the planes", and the actual planes were substituted by drones which relied the calls to ground. I have some evidence that cellphone calls could not be made from airplanes in 2001, but that is no longer a requirement: the forced phone calls could be relied by earth and not by the drones.



2. Where are the hijackers? You guys like to say they alive and well in SA... prove it... go out and take a picture or video of you asking them questions.
2. You guys say they boarded the 4 planes. Where are the tapes of the airport security? Where are the boarding gate videos? You know, if you tell the world mr X did a crime you should PROVE it. Not ask people to PROVE he didn't. I'm sure law works THIS way and not the other way around.



3. How did the debris including destroyed cars, bent light poles, AA debris and parts, smashed generators and broken down fences get planted without being seen? I mean that highway is busy as hell and people saw it happen not to mention news teams were there within minutes.

3. Planted? No: a drone (an unmanned remote guided plane or a cruise missile) disguised as a AA 757 hit the pentagon. The drone was smaller than a 757, that's why we don't have -for example- the damage of the rear tail wing on the upper two stories of the pentagon. A 757 crashing with a window at 500mph, why it doesn't leave any sign whatsoever?

CGI plane of the real size of AA77 added before the actual photo of the damage on the pentagon face:

http://newguards.us/brent/jpg/Penta_Plane_3dsbd.jpg



4. How come no one in the area of the pentagon claimed to have seen a missile? All at the scene claimed to have seen a large commercial airliner resembling an AA plane hit the pentagon and many others claimed to have atleaste seen a large commercial airliner in the area flying low towars the pentagon.

4. Because it was disguised as an AA airliner. And you're wrong, not everyone reported the same testimony of a large commercial airliner, some of the sparse ones (3), unaffected by say-so saw a small commuter plane; some other just reported to have seen an AA airliner while not telling anything about the size of it; Playing devil advocate you could think that an operation big as this would warrant at least 20-30 fake testimony placed among real people to tell the chosen story, right?
People that attended a magician show once saw the Statue of Liberty disappear.
So as I told earlier it's the phyisics the single objective point you cannot manipulate. There's no sign of the rear tail wing in the pentagon face, no one could question this. It's the strongest direct evidence toward the "no AA77 at the pentagon" theory, you should start here if you really want to challenge a theory.



5. Why do you guys think the WTC came down like a demo?

5a. Because the collapses of the three buildings have more than 10 elements in common with controlled demolition while showing zero elements of gravitational collapses. See architects and engineers for 9/11 truth website, right column: www.ae911truth.org



Demos come down from the bottom up, highly visible, all floors are blown in order and it falls as one.

5b. That is not correct. The "Controlled" part of the "Controlled Demolitions" imply that demolitors can collapse a building the way they choose. A normal c.d. aims to collapse a building without harming other nearby buildings, so it proceeds from the inner to the outside of the plant, half second that it proceeds at some selected floors (or all of them), usually from the bottom ones moving upward.
That's because destroying the inner plant first forces the building to collapse from outside to inside, on itself, not collapsing in some direction, then the other explosions and cuts demolish the upper blocks.
But that is not a rule, it's just that the usual target of c.d. : see a very small c.d. proceed downward here.
VZ1E2NPl-s8



The WTC came down from the impact zone, pancaked and the "SQUIBS" were seen in no particular order. So how did you morons really buy into that?

5c. Let's examine three of the elements I cited earlier (among the list of the "10 elements in common with controlled demolition while showing zero elements of gravitational collapses"): I don't even need to cite SQUIBS to achieve a physical impossible.
The collapses proceed at almost free fall speed, through the path of most resistence, while pulverizing all contenents.
Even two of the three is impossible: a gravitational collapse has only potential energy to account for, and if you spend all of it to achieve free fall speed you cannot simultaneously have a collapse through the path of most resistance, because you don't have any other energy left to allocate to winning the resistance of the 80 underlying floors. Add to that that during the collapses 99% of the contents of the WTC have been pulverized into thin dust, that is other energy to account for that you simply don't have.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=135305&postcount=6

And when you look at WTC7 collapse there isn't even an "official theory" to challenge: FEMA report doesn't acknowledge WTC7 existence nor its collapse, 9/11 commission report doesn't acknowledge WTC7 existence nor its collapse, NIST NCSTAR1 acknowledge the existence and collapse of WTC7, but it fails to even address how and why it collapsed.
That's why "we morons buy into that".



6. Why do you guys take the fire figher quotes out of context? Yes many firefighters reported hearing large cracks and explosions. However if you read the full transcripts most also point out that it sounded like or easily could have been transformers blowing up or gas lines rupturing. So why cut those parts out when presenting this?
6. Because WTC was a Class A building, and there were NO FUCKING GAS LINES in it. Only electric stooves. And many others tell about VERY BIG EXPLOSIONS, coming from middle floors!
Let's say I choose one and you comment it, ok? See this from minute 1:30 to minute 2:30. Maybe they're ALL wrong.
7_E4N5YIycI



7. Why do you guys think fire was the excuse? No report has ever said fire is what took the towers down. Fire and heat temperatures have always been just one of the many factors from that day. Among the factores were, fire, heat and severe structural damage. The building was hit buy a plane larger than what it was designed for and carrying twice as much fuel, it took out major support components.
7a. I don't even need to challenge this straw-man claim. It's the dinamic of the collapse that is proven to be impossible, so I really don't need to discuss how the collapse started to prove the WTC were brought down in controlled demolitions.

But if you really want to impress me, show me the big fires that brought down WTC7, the building that collapsed 6 hours later without even being hit by a plane. The best photo I have seen shows 3 small fire pockets in 3 different floors. Or the massive mechanical damage, no one proved it.
Remember that no steel framed highrise building even fell anytime in history before or after 9/11 from fires. It simply didn't happen because steel framed buildings are essentially a big heat sink, so a fire could consume all the contents but leave the steel structure standing (as in One Meridian Plaza, which burned for 26 hours and did not collapse).
Instead even with WTC7 we see the collapse at free fall speed through the path of most resistance - a physical impossible.



8. Why do you think the planes that hit were not commercial airliners? As far as I have seen only one person has claimed it was a military plane and he was way up town. Thousands were there that day and saw the symbols on the side and saw the type of plane, no one said otherwise. Millions saw it on tv.... so why make this bogus claim?
8. Who claimed that, and where, please?



9. Where is the proof of this molten steel? Okay so sure possibly there was a pool of somthing down there.... where is the picture and more importantly the proof it was steel? It very well could have been alluminum from the planes.

9. I posted it in great detail in the debate: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=136996&postcount=18
And don't forget the satellite thermal photos of 9/16 with temperatures far higher than jetfuel burning... also in the debate.


Lets also not forget that the fires continued for weeks afterwars... the pile was like a furnace.
9a. A gravitational collapse leaves pools of molten steel, for as much as 40 days, and you don't see anything strange in that. Nice denial.



10. Why do you claim the evidence was shipped away so fast? It took months to recover it all and after that it was sent across the bay where it sat for months while it was combed over for human remains. This debris was not shipped of to China the next day or even month for that matter.... and certainly not all at once when it did begin to get shipped off.
10. "So fast" that even NIST couldn't search for explosives residues, nor could anyone else. I can offer many references that show the deliberate destruction of a crime scente - but it's a non-issue. Clear the stronger claims first, like the collapse dynamic, where was Dick Cheney at 9:30 and missing the rear tail damage at the pentagon.



11. Why do you claim there was a standdown order?

11a. Because the plane was followed on both military and civil radars, the standard procedure is to make AT LEAST an intercept, that is sending armed warplanes to check it, we know those planes were in range for an intercept or at the very least try it (because of course at 9:30 they didn't know the target yet), and facts talks: the plane was not intercepted.
So evidence shows there was some sort of military stand down.



Watching the video on youtube you hear the phrase "HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY?" When Cheney says that he is replying to the question from the aid about the shootdown order. He is simply saying have you heard anything besides a shootdown order. If this standdown order was given... somthing the vice president is not in power to authorize then why were f15s scrambled already and prepared to intercept? (Someone really explain this one)

11b. The shootdown order for AA77 (the pentagon plane) was not given - even 9/11 commission report is very clear about it.
But the main issue here is that all the official version supporters cannot even acknowledge that Dick Cheney was in the room, aware and in command at 9:30, when the difference could be made. Mineta deposition under oath is clear. And page 40 of 9/11 commission report just states the opposite. It's an uncoincevable question for the supporters of the official version. They cannot even tell us WHO WAS IN CHARGE!



12. Why have only a few hundreds scientists/engineers/architects worldwide joined the movement and claim conspiracy?

12a. Please remember that you cannot use the "conspiracy" word to shun all who think the opposite of you. It's unfair and it's also wrong, because even the "official" version is a conspiracy theory! It's the "arab world vs western nations" conspiracy theory, involving AQ, OBL and 19 boxcutter armed suicide hijackers.



There are millions in each field. My suggestion is look up the credntials of these guys. As we have seen with Steven Jones... He has no credentials with structural engineering or earth physics... the guy studied astro physics.... That might be why the entire Engineering dept at his school went against him?
You can see a list of real world architects and engineers, all listed with name, surname, occupation, credentials, here: http://www.ae911truth.org/signpetition.php
You can see another list of different kinds of professionals here: http://patriotsquestion911.com/
130+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
100+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
230+ Professors Question 9/11
200+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
130+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals



13. Why did no toher foreign intel agencies uncover the govt doing this? Certainly countries like Russia and China who would love to slander the U.S. govt are capable of finding such a plot. They would bring it to light instantly in order to destroy respect and reliance for the U.S. govt.
13. Because it's not their goal to provoke WW3.
And I'm sorry to tell you that your president managed to destroy all your nation credibility all alone by invading Iraq based on 935 deliberate lies. (FACT - your own intel agencies tell us this! See: )


Instead what was the chatter before 9/11? Increased terrorist chatter from Osama and point outs of a possible strike on the U.S.
13b. Yes, planted evidence works this way. 9/11 didn't start on 9/11/2001, it was carefully planned years ahead. Even only the planting of explosives and thermites cutting charges in the WTC in secret took months at best.



14. Why has Osama never admitted he is innocent? If he is so innocent why not admit it? Instead in every video he provokes the U.S. and gives reasoning behind the attack.
14. Because he's long since dead.
You can look for the last video interview of Benhazir Bhutto, before she was murdered. She tell the world WHO EXACTLY killed OBL. (It just skipped the front page of your free press, right? But they talked about poor Bhutto, right?)

UnychOXj9Tg

He's now just a figure created to scare people into accepting civil rights reductions, greater military spending, and a couple of unfair wars.
But we could also reverse the issue here: with all the secret services in the world looking out for you, with echelon, all the increased spending in security... how is he capable of producing and deliver a tape every other month and still not be found? PLEASE!



15. So if this was a conspiracy I guess the Cole, Africa Embassies and WTC attack in 91 were all also conspiracies? Sorry but those were carried out by the same organization so if this was a fake as you claim then those were also because you are stating this terrorist network is basically a fake fear.
15. Maybe, I don't know about the others the same deal of what I know of 9/11. I can tell you JFK was shot from behind on the right and his head went to the left but backward. I can tell you that in WTC bombing in 91 (or was it 93?) the people who supplied the explosives to the terrorists was the FBI. I can tell you that the train bombed in London have the floor with dents going upward while the official story is that the bomb was shoulder carried and not below the trains... and I can tell you that AQ was the CIA unit created in the eighties to fight commies in afghanistan. If you want we could talk about these too, first start by googling that, you'll see OFFICIAL PAPERS show up. I wrote and really mean OFFICIAL PAPERS, not random conspiracy websites. Try it. God bless the internet!



16. Why since 9/11 have several major studies been done by MIT engineering and Purdue about the WTC all come up with similar findings to the comission? These were independent studies, not paid for or funded in any way by the govt. You guys keep saying another report must be done? Well many have by independent firms and schools and they are all disagreeing with your theory.
16. Haha! I, for one, a random italian IT specialist / teacher, proved wrong a PURDUE study, all alone; that's the level of expertise it takes do prove them wrong! See:
Look for their animation of planes vs WTC : the fuselage is weak and the engines are strong, they go all the way through (at time 2:00):
3UvPWny_PBc
Look at their animation of plane vs Pentagon : the fuselage is strong and the engies DISAPPEAR! But the aluminium fuselage is so strong to make the 4-foot punch out hole at the third ring, only to disappear seconds later (at time: 0:33)
XaIpIj2y3mM

What a deep study they made, isn't it? They could not even be consistent to themselves!



17. Why would the admin do 9/11 as an excuse for Iraq? Iraq focused little on terrorism and more on WMDs. There were no Iraqis on the planes that day, why plan to invade Iraq and claim terrorist ties but put no Iraqis who could then be said to have been funded by Saddam?
17. You ask me? I don't claim 9/11 was the excuse for Iraq. I claim 9/11 was the excuse for starting what is highlighted in the Project for a New American Century and Rebuilding American Defenses. Those official papers propose an increased spending in the military-industial complex, modernizing the army, but tell those trasformations would be slow unless "some sort of catalizing event, such a new pearl harbor, would happen".
Really.
Then look at the members who signed PNAC anc check that against the Bush administration senior figures. What a startling coincidence!



18. What benifit does the U.S. being in Afghanistan really play? I mean sure you can claim it gives us a base of operations over there... not really though we have military bases all over the region.

After you read even the main parts of PNAC you should know that "bases shoud be moved forward", and there's the need to create the need for "a permanent deployment of american armies in the oil rich region of middle east".
Iraq: a nightmare with no end in sight. Afghanistan: you remain until OBL is caught (what if he's already dead?). Iran: the next enemy is surrounded, and your media/administration is no light on accusing them of anything.
But as for afghanistan itself let me tell you something else you might have missed: in 2001 the taliban regime, following a strict muslim dictate, denounced all drugs as evil and burned many opium fields. Just as we saw again and again statues of bhudda being torn down they -also- did cause this heavy hit on drug worldwide, as opium gives you heroin. After they were removed - and after no one showed a connection between AQ/OBL and the taliban regime - in 2005 the opium production of afghanistan went back to full throttle, and afghanistan went back into being the top opium producer worldwide.
So the coalition troops can win against the taliban, but somehow they couldn't manage drug traffickers! Or something like that. Are we safe to say afghanistan invasion was at least an uncalled blessing for drug traffick? These are just dots, if you manage to connect them good for you, I didn't write any more of what I can prove - and you should check.



19. So why after all of these years has not ONE person involved turned up? Certainly people have values and feeling no matter how much money they were paid. This thing would have taken thousands of people to pull off and thousands more to pay off to keep quiet. So where are they all?

Well, you put a wrong conclusion right in the middle of the question: "Certainly people have values and feeling no matter how much money they were paid."
So you tell me a person who took part in the planning, execution or coverup of the murdering of 3000 own unarmed civilians suddently changes its mind, abjures its past self, and comes out with some sort of crucial element. All for feeling and values he never knew he had before. And he faces other people like his former self, ready to do anything, again for values and feelings.
Well, it seems this is YOUR BULLSHIT after all, not mine.



20. Why after your demo theory was proved bullshit did you guys move onto, missile pod then thermite and now possibly HAARP? Why are you guys so determined to prove this conspiracy true that you simply keep going further into space for possible causes.
20. The demo theory wasn't proved bullshit, not as 04/15/2008 that is. The gravitational collapse theory is, and NIST admitted a couple months ago that they didn't study the collapse dynamic (why?)
Missile pod is a common disinfo theory, a trojan horse defused on day two after it was presented. I don't support it, ask those who do.
And finally Haarp is linked to Chemtrails, why are you linking it to 9/11 is really a mystery to me.



21. Why is there no money trail or communication trail? Yes rumsfeld presented a few days before a massive ammount of money missing from within... OVER 12 YEARS HOWEVER!!! Do not claim that money went to 9/11... that money went to a govt spending on defense that is out of control adn foreign ops and arms sales done by the CIA most likely.
21a. Oh, and isn't it enough? Did you really grasp HOW MUCH MONEY IS THAT AMOUNT? $2,300,000,000,000. 2,3 million MILLION DOLLARS! I wrote 9/11 covered it up, because such a startling revelation was quickly forgotten in face of 9/11. Some devil advocate might think someone knew when was the right moment for such a revelation. The day before. But maybe it's just some other coincidence of that day.



Did the admin use morse code? As we have seen... emails and texts are impossible to erase... they can always be found. So where are the emails from Bush to the lowest people in the plot giving orders? NOTHING IS THERE!!!
21b. Noooo! Do you really believe this bullshit? Emails and texts impossible to erase?! Please tell me, I'm really eager to know where "we have seen" it. I'm an IT technician, but maybe you across the ocean managed it, so this is interesting two times: un-erasable data. Please please please. (this makes even with you calling people "morons")



23. Why do you claim the media is so biased and corrupt? Okay so the media may not present the best stuff always... HOWEVER... What about independent journalists? The ones that uncovered... Abu-Garhib, CIA torture flights, Walter Reed, Email scandal, GITMO, BlackWater... and dozens more scandals which this admin has not been able t keep quiet... why cant these same guys seem to find anything on 9/11? NOT THERE MAYBE???

23. Maybe, or maybe not. I don't have your same blind faith in Free press, even if they did it right in some occasions I proved to you that they hid Mineta deposition, they hid Bhutto last interview, I bet you didn't know shit about afghanistan, pnac, like you didn't know on which exactly are the biggest issues of 9/11.
If those people are too scared to talk about 9/11 I feel sorry for them, but I don't blame them. I prefer to talk facts, like those I presented.



24. Why are you so bent on finding a ct that in all probibility does not exist? There are things such as genocide ocruing in this world, Global Warming should be considered for the future.... or are things like that all a huge conspiracy also?

24. Let's say that because as an italian I owe "you" for freeing us from the Facists, I think the least I can do to repay my debt is to do my little to help U.S. free themselves from the terrorists that planned, executed and covered up 9/11.
And how do you know that I'm not active on genocides and the global warming scam? I posted about chemtrails in this very website. What about you? Any hard evidence to share?



NOTE: Organizations need to pull off plot: CIA, FBI, NSA, CONGRESS, PENTAGON, ARMY, NAVY, AIRFORCE, FDNY, NYPD, AA, UNITED, MI6, ALL FOREIGN INTEL SERVICES, DEMO CREWS, and many more I am sure I am leaving out.

Note. You may google Operation Northwoods, the clandestine US plan to provoke a war and invasion of Cuba through self-inflicted acts of terrorism on american soil, including downing a fake commercial flight substituted by a drone (and that was the sixties!). That would take the same amount of planning and personnel as 9/11, and it's a real US military plan which was de-secreted after a recent FOIA request. Surely you read of it in your mainstream media, right? You have free press, inquisitive, unbiased press, right?

---

Thanks Manu, maybe could you ask your friend to answer "where was Dick Cheney at 9:30 on 9/11/2001" for me? It's the a single simple question everyone avoids. Thanks.

Mr. P
04-15-2008, 07:27 PM
LMFAO!!!! :laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

jimnyc
04-16-2008, 04:50 PM
LMFAO!!!! :laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

I still get a chuckle out of the little pepperoni, but it's really more sad than funny.

Sertes
04-17-2008, 03:29 AM
I still get a chuckle out of the little pepperoni

You mean a shiver, right? Someone politely disagreeing with you in such a controversial matter, presenting its case with official papers and official testimonies, like it should happen in a real civil discussion... is surely hard to manage. Better surface from time to time with a joke or an insult, right?

Can a gravitational collapse proceed through the path of most resistance at free fall speed?

Why the damage of the rear tail wing of AA77 is not visible in first responders photos?

Which part of AA77 created the 12-foot round punch out hole, according to the official version?

How many people where needed for Operation Northwoods?

Where was Dick Cheney at 9:30, again?

jimnyc
04-18-2008, 06:11 PM
You mean a shiver, right? Someone politely disagreeing with you in such a controversial matter, presenting its case with official papers and official testimonies, like it should happen in a real civil discussion... is surely hard to manage. Better surface from time to time with a joke or an insult, right?

I've debated the issue with you over and over. You apparently didn't find my answers acceptable, and I found yours to be laughable. You repeat the same garbage over and over and over and over, as if it's magically going to be believed the billionth time you type it. I mean really, the calls were never made, the passengers were not killed in crashes but killed elsewhere and shipped to the medical facility? Even though we have many on scene responders who not only physically picked up MANY pieces of the planes you claim didn't crash, but also picked up bodies and body pieces from the scene. For cripes sake, tons of the jet pieces were viewable and photographed right on the pentagon lawn shortly after the crash.

Besides, I had pepperoni pizza the other night. It gave me heartburn. I don't need it from reading your regurgitated tripe.

Sertes
04-19-2008, 02:31 PM
I mean really, the calls were never made, the passengers were not killed in crashes but killed elsewhere and shipped to the medical facility? Even though we have many on scene responders who not only physically picked up MANY pieces of the planes you claim didn't crash, but also picked up bodies and body pieces from the scene. For cripes sake, tons of the jet pieces were viewable and photographed right on the pentagon lawn shortly after the crash.


Sure, you can keep pretending you answered all the major issues...
instead you cleared what you could, the minor ones, or linked solutions to straw-man arguments no one made.
You even cleared TWO issues I thought correct but turned out I was wrong about - thank you!

Then you can repeat ad nauseam all the elements supporting the official governative version, but all it takes is ONE major unexplainable physical element to make the official version crumble: if AA77 struck the pentagon the damage from the rear tail wing MUST BE VISIBLE.
The fact people found bodies and some random "plane" junk doesn't mean the aircraft that hit the pentagon was AA77. The fact that the people at the medical facility recognized them later isn't, either. The calls could be forced from earth. What are we SURE of? That a boeing 757 has a rear tail wing, and that wing wasn't on the lawn. And there's no hit in the pentagon face. So? I tell you a smaller aircraft did it.

jimnyc
04-24-2008, 10:25 AM
Sure, you can keep pretending you answered all the major issues...

Everything you asked of me I answered in our debate, as well as subsequent threads prior and after.


instead you cleared what you could, the minor ones, or linked solutions to straw-man arguments no one made.

I gave solid and factual evidence to what was/is available. YOU are the one who invents arguments when you can't get a neat and tidy answer that satisfies you. In your mind, any lingering questions must mean there is a conspiracy. You've yet to provide a single shred of factual evidence to backup a single claim of yours.


You even cleared TWO issues I thought correct but turned out I was wrong about - thank you!

I'm here to help!


Then you can repeat ad nauseam all the elements supporting the official governative version, but all it takes is ONE major unexplainable physical element to make the official version crumble: if AA77 struck the pentagon the damage from the rear tail wing MUST BE VISIBLE.

Here you go again, can't get a decent explanation to satisfy your garlic filled head and it immediately makes you scream "conspiracy"! And no, it does not have to be visible. It likely disintegrated upon impact.


The fact people found bodies and some random "plane" junk doesn't mean the aircraft that hit the pentagon was AA77.

The plane was identified on scene as that of AA77. Bodies on scene were identified as passengers of AA77.


The fact that the people at the medical facility recognized them later isn't, either.

Maybe they were actually killed on Mars before discreetly shipped via FedEx to the medical offices?


The calls could be forced from earth. What are we SURE of? That a boeing 757 has a rear tail wing, and that wing wasn't on the lawn. And there's no hit in the pentagon face. So? I tell you a smaller aircraft did it.

Whatever you say, Pepe le Pew!

hjmick
04-24-2008, 10:48 AM
Dude:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y113/hjmc3rd/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

I think you're wasting your time.

Sertes
04-24-2008, 11:34 AM
Dude:
I think you're wasting your time.

Oh, don't bother, those who died surely deserve my time, thank you anyway. And we're making progress here!


Everything you asked of me I answered in our debate, as well as subsequent threads prior and after.
No, this is false. To my memory:

"Can a gravitational collapse proceed through the path of most resistance at free fall speed?" was avoided or answered with a meaningless link

"Why the damage of the rear tail wing of AA77 is not visible in first responders photos?" was answered and cleared here with your wholly unbelivable "istantaneous disintegration without hit damage" theory.

"Which part of AA77 created the 12-foot round punch out hole, according to the official version?" was answered in three different ways: the landing gear pole, the landing gear wheel, I don't know.

"How many people where needed for Operation Northwoods?" was answered like "I don't know, but I don't care". Instead it's the same number needed for Operation 9/11, but that didn't stop the Joint Chief of Staff to present that plan for self-inflicted act of terrorism on US soil to blame on Cuba, to provide justification for the invasion.

"Where was Dick Cheney at 9:30, again?" GOOD LUCK ON THIS ONE!



I gave solid and factual evidence to what was/is available. YOU are the one who invents arguments when you can't get a neat and tidy answer that satisfies you. In your mind, any lingering questions must mean there is a conspiracy. You've yet to provide a single shred of factual evidence to backup a single claim of yours.
That's because I can prove the official version is false, not that my version is true. But that's not enough for you.


It likely disintegrated upon impact.
So the wings can penetrate, the aluminium fuselage can penetrate, but the rear tail wing disintegrate? Without even leaving a scratch? Against windows? A reinforced window hit by a plane at 550 mph, which disintegrates the hitting piece... yet no scratch on the hit one.



The plane was identified on scene as that of AA77. Bodies on scene were identified as passengers of AA77.
Bwhaahaha, no agency confirmed the pieces were from AA77. Sorry, another fact you didn't know.



Maybe they were actually killed on Mars before discreetly shipped via FedEx to the medical offices?
Yes, no one questions that days later, in the medical facility that received the bodies of the passengers of AA77 and UA93 those bodies were identified. The question is where they came from. My bet is they were actually killed on a secondary airfield, after being forced to provide phone calls to confirm "arab hijacked the planes", like Operation Northwoods proposed to use a secondary airfield to land the real plane and making the drone substitue plane explode after confirming they were under attack by cuban mig. Did you actually read my messages? Guess no. But that doesn't stop you from insulting:


Whatever you say, Pepe le Pew!

So I can accept you don't answer on the physical issues, as you're not a physic. But why you still dodge the Cheney/Mineta issue, a purely political issue, should make you think.

Good luck

jimnyc
04-24-2008, 12:09 PM
Bwhaahaha, no agency confirmed the pieces were from AA77. Sorry, another fact you didn't know.

Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. "It was absolutely a plane, and I'll tell you why," says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. "I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box." Kilsheimer's eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?"

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6

The black box was found, and confirmed by the NTSB.

You're too easy to debate, all of your lame answers and theories have been debunked on thousands of sites. You just make half the shit up without even properly verifying if it's true or not. But it's easy for some knucklehead from another country to make false claims. I'm sure your pasta filled brains will now claim that the box was fake or placed by Cheney himself.

Now, eat shit, fuckface.

Sertes
04-24-2008, 01:38 PM
Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer

Ok: according to himself this man...
was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash
helped coordinate the emergency response
saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building
picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them
held in hand the tail section of the plane! (where's now? wasn't that DISINTEGRATED ON IMPACT?)
found the black box
held in his hands parts of uniforms from crew members
held in his hands body parts

WOW! With a man like him finding Osama would be a joke! He makes Chuck Norris look like a boy scout!
Too bad that this man is also the man who later won the contract to rebuild the pentagon!!
http://www.caed.calpoly.edu/newsevents/kilsheimer.html

What an unbiased testimony he did pass to us! It's strange that Popular Mechanics didn't include this little item in the picture of this great man.



The black box was found, and confirmed by the NTSB.

The pieces, I wrote the pieces. Read. Any loser can place a fake black box, big deal! 80 tons of plane debris is another matter. And no agency confirmed the pieces were from AA77, only 2 times in US aviation history were plane pieces not confirmed by any agency. But it's the day of coincidences!!



You're too easy to debate, all of your lame answers and theories have been debunked on thousands of sites.

Then why is it so difficult to answer about the Cheney/Mineta issue?

Mr. P
04-25-2008, 12:00 AM
Dude:


I think you're wasting your time.

Yep!

Sertes
04-28-2008, 07:50 AM
You may say I'm a dreamer...
...but I'm not the only one

This is an article on 911blogger of someone else interested in Mineta deposition! FYI Lee Hamilton is the vice-chairman of 9/11 Commission, listen to what he says in the interview, expecially in the last 10 seconds.
Look how he's uneasy answering, despite the clear attempt of the interviewer to change the topic and giving him the excuse not to answer.

2AvQXW0Zn3M



As we all know, Norman Mineta's testimony was never investigated or mentioned in the 9/11 Report. You would think that the "young man" that was involved in such an important moment during the 9/11 attacks would be named, and brought before the 9/11 Commission. He was not.

This clip is from C-SPAN's 5/26/2005 taping of the "Washington Journal". The caller clearly states that at the time the Pentagon was hit, Cheney was aware of the incoming plane according to Norman Mineta's testimony. At the end of this segment, Lee Hamilton says that Cheney was "in the key position at the time". Prior to that, he said that "the Vice President was in the operation room", and "when the impact did occur." To me, this sounds like Lee Hamilton just confirmed Norman Mineta's testimony.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/15198

stang56k
04-28-2008, 08:26 AM
You mean a shiver, right? Someone politely disagreeing with you in such a controversial matter, presenting its case with official papers and official testimonies, like it should happen in a real civil discussion... is surely hard to manage. Better surface from time to time with a joke or an insult, right?

Can a gravitational collapse proceed through the path of most resistance at free fall speed?

Why the damage of the rear tail wing of AA77 is not visible in first responders photos?

Which part of AA77 created the 12-foot round punch out hole, according to the official version?

How many people where needed for Operation Northwoods?

Where was Dick Cheney at 9:30, again?

The biggest conspiracy of all time is the conspiracy of the "offical story" of 911. What a fuckin joke the offical story is.

Dilloduck
04-28-2008, 08:32 AM
The biggest conspiracy of all time is the conspiracy of the "offical story" of 911. What a fuckin joke the offical story is.

Please explain to us what you think actually happened from start to finish. Please do not leave out anything.

jimnyc
04-28-2008, 09:02 AM
You may say I'm a dreamer...
...but I'm not the only one

This is an article on 911blogger of someone else interested in Mineta deposition! FYI Lee Hamilton is the vice-chairman of 9/11 Commission, listen to what he says in the interview, expecially in the last 10 seconds.
Look how he's uneasy answering, despite the clear attempt of the interviewer to change the topic and giving him the excuse not to answer.


You're "expecially" stupid, pepperoni boy.


The biggest conspiracy of all time is the conspiracy of the "offical story" of 911. What a fuckin joke the offical story is.

Figures, two conspiracy idiots who think they know everything when they can't even spell the simplest of words! :laugh2:

You are "offically" a fucking idiot!

stang56k
04-28-2008, 09:03 AM
Please explain to us what you think actually happened from start to finish. Please do not leave out anything.

No. How bout you prove one sliver of the official story. The offical story was brought to you by the works of the media and your goverment. If you think for a second those institutions would not lie to you, you have bigger problems anyways.

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies" Congressmen Ron Paul

jimnyc
04-28-2008, 09:17 AM
No. How bout you prove one sliver of the official story. The offical story was brought to you by the works of the media and your goverment. If you think for a second those institutions would not lie to you, you have bigger problems anyways.

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies" Congressmen Ron Paul

The "official" story has flight 77 crashing into the pentagon, while conspiracy idiots think it was a missile. Plane parts, bodies and official black boxes were all recovered on the scene. Prove that this version of events is incorrect. Not a theory but PROOF that it's incorrect. Anything short of absolute proof will get you dismissed and laughed at like the rest.

The "official" story has another plane crashing in Pennsylvania. Passengers on this plane actually spoke to their loved ones before the plane crashed and explained what was happening. They fought the terrorists and the plane crashed short of it's likely target. Prove that this version of events is incorrect. Not a theory but PROOF that it's incorrect. Anything short of absolute proof will get you dismissed and laughed at like the rest.

stang56k
04-28-2008, 09:34 AM
The "official" story has flight 77 crashing into the pentagon, while conspiracy idiots think it was a missile. Plane parts, bodies and official black boxes were all recovered on the scene. Prove that this version of events is incorrect. Not a theory but PROOF that it's incorrect. Anything short of absolute proof will get you dismissed and laughed at like the rest.

The "official" story has another plane crashing in Pennsylvania. Passengers on this plane actually spoke to their loved ones before the plane crashed and explained what was happening. They fought the terrorists and the plane crashed short of it's likely target. Prove that this version of events is incorrect. Not a theory but PROOF that it's incorrect. Anything short of absolute proof will get you dismissed and laughed at like the rest.

Well im laughing at you and your "official story". :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: Did Fox News tell you thats what happend or somthing?

stang56k
04-28-2008, 09:40 AM
The "official" story has flight 77 crashing into the pentagon, while conspiracy idiots think it was a missile. Plane parts, bodies and official black boxes were all recovered on the scene. Prove that this version of events is incorrect. Not a theory but PROOF that it's incorrect. Anything short of absolute proof will get you dismissed and laughed at like the rest.

The "official" story has another plane crashing in Pennsylvania. Passengers on this plane actually spoke to their loved ones before the plane crashed and explained what was happening. They fought the terrorists and the plane crashed short of it's likely target. Prove that this version of events is incorrect. Not a theory but PROOF that it's incorrect. Anything short of absolute proof will get you dismissed and laughed at like the rest.

Just like Iraq had "Weapons of mass destruction" *rolls eyes*.... Our goverment has "Weapons of Mass Desception".

jimnyc
04-28-2008, 09:41 AM
Well im laughing at you and your "official story". :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: Did Fox News tell you thats what happend or somthing?

I'll take that to mean you can't provide us with any proof then? And no, the versions I have laid out came from passengers on the planes, eyewitnesses, relatives of the deceased, first responders, thousands of investigators and the 9/11 commission.

BTW, why is it that the idiots who believe in these conspiracies cannot spell and formulate paragraphs?

jimnyc
04-28-2008, 09:41 AM
Just like Iraq had "Weapons of mass destruction" *rolls eyes*.... Our goverment has "Weapons of Mass Desception".

Please get back to me with what "desception" means. Never heard of that word before.

stang56k
04-28-2008, 10:01 AM
The First Fifteen Minutes of September 11th
Former Air Traffic Controller Robin Hordon speaks out
on 9/11, NORAD and what should have happened on 9/11.
By Jeremy Baker

http://www.communitycurrency.org/robin.html








The Norad Stand Down in 2 Minutes
stand down



NORAD, responsible for intercepting errant aircraft over the U.S., has a standard operating procedure for scrambling planes for interception which takes less than 15 minutes

They did this successfully (on time) 129 times in 2000 and and 67 times between September 2000 and June 2001.

Yet, on September 11th, they failed to do their job 4 times in a single day:

* NORAD, once notified of the off-course aircraft, failed to scramble jets from the nearest bases

* Once airborne, interceptors failed to reach their targets because they flew at small fractions of their top speeds

* Fighters that were airborne and within interception range of the deviating aircraft were not redeployed to pursue them

You might think that the military couldn't find the hijacked planes because the hijackers turned off the transponders. However, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off (also, listen to this interview).

Indeed, Norad's stand down on 9/11 is so blatant that Norad has given 3 entirely different versions of what happened that day. Norad's false, ever-shifting explanations were so severe that the 9/11 Commission considered recommending criminal charges for making false statements

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2008/03/norad-stand-down-in-2-minut...

stang56k
04-28-2008, 10:17 AM
Please get back to me with what "desception" means. Never heard of that word before.

Sorry... me dont listen to enuff Rush Limbaugh to be teached 2 spell.

Im glad you can resort to calling out petty spelling flaws to justifiy your cause, props to you. :clap::clap::clap: ..those are golf claps btw.

Here, lets pretend this banana is waving a "box" :poop: ...ok... Lets try somthing really... really... hard that you probaly have not ever done before, Its called thinking outside the "box". If you steped out of it once for a few seconds you would realize this paradigm reality that you live in is a hoax. A sham. A constructed Illusion. I hope you enjoy it in there. It is really a box of poop.

stang56k
04-28-2008, 10:58 AM
Your evidence that people talked to their loved ones is a weak argument btw.



http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO408B.html


The Technology of Wireless Transmission

The Report conveys the impression that cell phone ground-to-air communication from high altitude was of reasonably good quality, and that there was no major impediment or obstruction in wireless transmission.

Some of the conversations were with onboard air phones, which contrary to the cell phones provide for good quality transmission. The report does not draw a clear demarcation between the two types of calls.

More significantly, what this carefully drafted script fails to mention is that, given the prevailing technology in September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place a wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000 feet:

"Wireless communications networks weren't designed for ground-to-air communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they're surprised the calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they lasted as long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground ( http://www.elliott.org/technology/2001/cellpermit.htm

Expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry casts serious doubt on "the findings" of the 9/11 Commission. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks:

"it was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations... From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a certain altitude" ( http://wirelessreview.com/ar/wireless_final_contact/ )





New Wireless Technology

While serious doubts regarding the cell calls were expressed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless telecom industry has further contributed to upsetting the Commission's credibility. Within days of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July, American Airlines and Qualcomm, proudly announced the development of a new wireless technology --which will at some future date allow airline passengers using their cell phones to contact family and friends from a commercial aircraft (no doubt at a special rate aerial roaming charge) (see http://www.qualcomm.com/press/releases/2004/040715_aa_testflight.html )

"Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls." (WP, July 27, 2004)

Aviation Week (07/20/04) described this new technology in an authoritative report published in July 2004:

"Qualcomm and American Airlines are exploring [July 2004] ways for passengers to use commercial cell phones inflight for air-to-ground communication. In a recent 2-hr. proof-of-concept flight, representatives from government and the media used commercial Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) third-generation cell phones to place and receive calls and text messages from friends on the ground.

For the test flight from Dallas-Fort Worth, the aircraft was equipped with an antenna in the front and rear of the cabin to transmit cell phone calls to a small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station. This "pico cell" transmitted cell phone calls from the aircraft via a Globalstar satellite to the worldwide terrestrial phone network"

Needless to say, neither the service, nor the "third generation" hardware, nor the "Picco cell" CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001.

jimnyc
04-28-2008, 12:19 PM
The First Fifteen Minutes of September 11th
Former Air Traffic Controller Robin Hordon

First off, your link doesn't work, but it doesn't matter. I guess when you read your little conspiracy sites you forget to do a little background checking before repeating the same garbage that others have already laughed at. Robin Hordon hasn't been involved in AT in nearly 30 years! That's almost as good as the other half of the lollipop stick and his expert witness show turned out to be a janitor in the WTC.

jimnyc
04-28-2008, 12:26 PM
Your evidence that people talked to their loved ones is a weak argument btw.

No, your claim that it was unlikely is what is weak. You and Sertes both, neither have shown a shred of evidence to counter claim what the loved ones have stated. The actions they described in the plane go 100% with what the black box activity shows. I can also post articles from experts in the field who will show that this was completely normal and no conspiracy, but what's the point? Both of you knuckleheads want to keep repeating the same crap over and over - and after 7 years there is STILL NO PROOF WHATSOEVER of any type of conspiracy. Lots of non-belief from the kooks and retarded theories, but zero evidence to backup those claims. Come back when you have some cold hard evidence.

Dismissed.

Gaffer
04-28-2008, 12:40 PM
I guess the first moron went to find a back up for his silliness. There is no talking with these fools. They are locked into a frame of mind and absolutely no proof of anything will change that. Reality is not something these guys have a firm hold on.

stang56k
04-28-2008, 01:39 PM
No, your claim that it was unlikely is what is weak. You and Sertes both, neither have shown a shred of evidence to counter claim what the loved ones have stated. The actions they described in the plane go 100% with what the black box activity shows. I can also post articles from experts in the field who will show that this was completely normal and no conspiracy, but what's the point? Both of you knuckleheads want to keep repeating the same crap over and over - and after 7 years there is STILL NO PROOF WHATSOEVER of any type of conspiracy. Lots of non-belief from the kooks and retarded theories, but zero evidence to backup those claims. Come back when you have some cold hard evidence.

Dismissed.

Your paragraph above is a double edge sword, I can say the exact same thing with your so called evidence, a bunch of wishful thinking and faulse assumptions. You would think after 7 years the offical story could present some crediable evidence in its favor. All anyone has to say is building # 7 and anything you said previous goes out the window. So here it is. Building #7. Prove why that came down with the conditions it was in and I might have to rethink my stance.

Im not taking the "loved ones conversation" which seems to be your only retort as a solution to a huge mess called 9/11.

Gaffer
04-28-2008, 02:01 PM
Your paragraph above is a double edge sword, I can say the exact same thing with your so called evidence, a bunch of wishful thinking and faulse assumptions. You would think after 7 years the offical story could present some crediable evidence in its favor. All anyone has to say is building # 7 and anything you said previous goes out the window. So here it is. Building #7. Prove why that came down with the conditions it was in and I might have to rethink my stance.

Im not taking the "loved ones conversation" which seems to be your only retort as a solution to a huge mess called 9/11.

Two much larger buildings next to it collapsed weakening the structure. Doesn't make any difference how much proof you are given you will not accept it because you made your mind up and are determined to live only in your fantasy world.

stang56k
04-28-2008, 03:20 PM
Two much larger buildings next to it collapsed weakening the structure. Doesn't make any difference how much proof you are given you will not accept it because you made your mind up and are determined to live only in your fantasy world.

Sorry, if 19 guys from the caves of afganistan with box cutters take over 4 full planes screaming "Durrka, Durrka, Durrka" while simultaneously disabling NORAD, and Fly airplanes at inmaneuverable speeds into buildings all in the name of Allah sounds far fetched to me.

jimnyc
04-28-2008, 04:38 PM
I guess the first moron went to find a back up for his silliness. There is no talking with these fools. They are locked into a frame of mind and absolutely no proof of anything will change that. Reality is not something these guys have a firm hold on.

I love when Sertes spends a month typing up his drivel and it gets debunked in seconds! LOL

The second moron is just that, a moron. He just wants to claim conspiracy and tug at his johnson while he types.

Sertes
04-29-2008, 03:19 AM
Two much larger buildings next to it collapsed weakening the structure. Doesn't make any difference how much proof you are given you will not accept it because you made your mind up and are determined to live only in your fantasy world.

But the fact FEMA report doesn't even mention building 7?
And the fact 9/11 commission report doesn't even mention building 7?
And the fact that years later NIST acknowledged the existence and collapse of building 7 BUT IN SEVEN YEARS FAILED TO EXPLAIN HOW AND WHY IT FELL should make you think.

Your own explanation of two much larger building next to in collapsed could be used for any building next to the Twin Towers, why instead only building 7 fell, after 6 hours, straight down through the path of most resistence at free fall speed?

jimnyc
04-29-2008, 08:59 AM
But the fact FEMA report doesn't even mention building 7?
And the fact 9/11 commission report doesn't even mention building 7?
And the fact that years later NIST acknowledged the existence and collapse of building 7 BUT IN SEVEN YEARS FAILED TO EXPLAIN HOW AND WHY IT FELL should make you think.

Your own explanation of two much larger building next to in collapsed could be used for any building next to the Twin Towers, why instead only building 7 fell, after 6 hours, straight down through the path of most resistence at free fall speed?

You stupid cannoli eating fuck, they fell because of major damage and fires. I'll believe the firemen that were actually in the building over some little prick a billion miles away. Unless you can give us PROOF of something else, go fuck yourself. And save your retarded stories about people who heard something go "boom". Lots of things went boom on 9/11, and things are still going boom in your head, and none of us can explain everything. I hope your boyfriend Mario shits on your next pizza.

Sertes
04-29-2008, 12:05 PM
You stupid cannoli eating fuck, they fell because of major damage and fires. I'll believe the firemen that were actually in the building over some little prick a billion miles away. Unless you can give us PROOF of something else, go fuck yourself. And save your retarded stories about people who heard something go "boom". Lots of things went boom on 9/11, and things are still going boom in your head, and none of us can explain everything. I hope your boyfriend Mario shits on your next pizza.

Ok, you're getting angry and angry as you come closer to truth. That is good, but keep your insults for those who care, or maybe for those who did it, the terrorists.

Now this is your personal reconstruction of what happened at building 7.
I ask again, and please don't evade the question again:

Why seven years after 9/11 there's still no OFFICIAL explanation on why or how building 7 fell?

...and who cares about the booms? I told you that a building cannot physically collapse through the path of most resistance at free fall speed, not that the booms prove anything definitive!

jimnyc
04-29-2008, 12:31 PM
No proof of anything other than what many people witnessed with their own eyes, a building that fell that was heavily damaged and on fire. Like I said, go fuck yourself, little italian rat boy.

Sertes
04-30-2008, 12:04 PM
No proof of anything other than what many people witnessed with their own eyes, a building that fell that was heavily damaged and on fire. Like I said, go fuck yourself, little italian rat boy.

Heavily damaged like the photo you cannot provide? Or like the photo you provided that showed 4,7% damage of a single side? Or the raging inferno of 3 isolated pockets? Look: even if it's all false, I don't even care what caused the collapse to start. No building can fall at free fall speed through the path of most resistance. 47 floors, 6.5 seconds. No official explanation. Two studies that try to hide that. The collapse never passed again on TV. Game over, man.

Now take a deep breath, then use the oxigen to think.

http://www.v911t.org/images/wtc7_collapse_lg.gif

jimnyc
04-30-2008, 12:23 PM
Still no proof though pepperoni boy, go fuck yourself.

stang56k
04-30-2008, 12:25 PM
Heavily damaged like the photo you cannot provide? Or like the photo you provided that showed 4,7% damage of a single side? Or the raging inferno of 3 isolated pockets? Look: even if it's all false, I don't even care what caused the collapse to start. No building can fall at free fall speed through the path of most resistance. 47 floors, 6.5 seconds. No official explanation. Two studies that try to hide that. The collapse never passed again on TV. Game over, man.

Now take a deep breath, then use the oxigen to think.

http://www.v911t.org/images/wtc7_collapse_lg.gif

owned :dance::dance::dance: Look who had offices in building #7. conveintly.


What Was In Building 7?
Building 7 was one of New York City's larger buildings. A sleek bronze-colored skyscraper with a trapezoidal footprint, it occupied an entire city block and rose over 600 feet above street level.

Built in 1985, it was formerly the headquarters of the junk-bond firm Drexel Burnham Lambert, which contributed to the Savings and Loans collapse, prompting the $500-billion taxpayer-underwritten bailout of the latter 1980s. At the time of its destruction, it exclusively housed government agencies and financial institutions. It contained offices of the IRS, Secret Service, and SEC.

Tenant Square Feet Floor Industry
Salomon Smith Barney 1,202,900 GRND,1-6,13,18-46 Financial Institution
IRS Regional Council 90,430 24, 25 Government
U.S. Secret Service 85,343 9,10 Government
C.I.A. N/A N/A Government
American Express Bank International 106,117 7,8,13 Financial Institution
Standard Chartered Bank 111,398 10,13,26,27 Financial Institution
Provident Financial Management 9,000 7,13 Financial Institution
ITT Hartford Insurance Group 122,590 19-21 [Insurance]
First State Management Group, Inc 4,000 21 Insurance
Federal Home Loan Bank 47,490 22 Financial Institution
NAIC Securities 22,500 19 Insurance
Securities & Exchange Commission 106,117 11,12,13 Government
Mayor's Office of Emergency Mgmt 45,815 23 Government
This list is based on a table published by CNN.com, which did not include CIA, whose tenancy was disclosed after the attack in the New York Times article. 1
One of the most interesting tenants was then-Mayor Giuliani's Office of Emergency Management, and its emergency command center on the 23rd floor. This floor received 15 million dollars worth of renovations, including independent and secure air and water supplies, and bullet and bomb resistant windows designed to withstand 200 MPH winds. 2 The 1993 bombing must have been part of the rationale for the command center, which overlooked the Twin Towers, a prime terrorist target.

How curious that on the day of the attack, Guiliani and his entourage set up shop in a different headquarters, abandoning the special bunker designed precisely for such an event. 3

jimnyc
04-30-2008, 12:28 PM
owned

You 2 dipshits own yourselves over and over with each post! Now where's the proof that any of the buildings fell other than what we have already been told? You repeat the same crap that's on 400 other nutcase sites and nobody ever offers anything other than their delusional disbelief. Go fuck yourself.

stang56k
04-30-2008, 12:43 PM
The huge increases in U.S. military spending that have occurred since the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, were planned before President George W. Bush was elected by the same men who are pushing the administration’s “war on terrorism” and the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Billions of dollars in additional defense spending are but the first step in the group’s long-term plan to transform the U.S. military into a global army enforcing a terroristic and bloody Pax Americana around the world.

A neo-conservative Washington-based organization known as the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), funded by three foundations closely tied to Persian Gulf oil and weapons and defense industries, drafted the war plan for U.S. global domination through military power.

stang56k
04-30-2008, 01:29 PM
'Axis of Evil' author David Frum Responds to Questions With Physical Assault and Obscene Language

Aaron Dykes / JonesReport.com | April 28, 2008


A member of We Are Change L.A. was assaulted and cursed at by former White House speech writer David Frum during a book signing, according to reports.

Frum-- a neo-con policy maker who is often credited with coining the phrase 'Axis of Evil'-- allegedly lost his temper when he recognized Stewart Howe, of We Are Change L.A., from a previous book signing. Howe approached Frum to ask a question when Frum became angry, and then violent, reports indicate.

Frum told Howe, "The one thing I regret from our last conversation is that I didn't say to you what my friend Christopher Hitchens said... which is, you should fuck off." [expletive is reportedly a direct quote]

According to Howe, David Frum then got up from behind the book signing table and swung at Stewart and his camera while he was phrasing a question about the unraveling 9/11 cover-up and potential criminal charges.
(See video for the rest of the conversation).
[link to www.jonesreport.com] (http://www.jonesreport.com%5D)

jimnyc
05-01-2008, 07:10 AM
Stang - So that your posts don't need to be edited/deleted, please cut them down to 2-3 paragraphs of the original and leave a link to the rest. This is in the board rules and will keep us from breaking any copyright laws.

Oh, and find some proof too, as those articles don't prove anything other than whackos exist in our world.

Sertes
05-02-2008, 04:31 AM
Oh, and find some proof too, as those articles don't prove anything other than whackos exist in our world.

Can we go back to some unanswered question, jim?
Like when your 'testimony' at the pentagon proved out to be part of the military establishment?
Or the lack of an official version that can explain how WTC7 fell through the path of most resistance at free fall speed in a 'gravitational collapse', that is without explosives? What's the official version, Jim?

jimnyc
05-02-2008, 06:57 AM
Can we go back to some unanswered question, jim?
Like when your 'testimony' at the pentagon proved out to be part of the military establishment?
Or the lack of an official version that can explain how WTC7 fell through the path of most resistance at free fall speed in a 'gravitational collapse', that is without explosives? What's the official version, Jim?

We can go back to unanswered questions as soon as you post PROOF/EVIDENCE to backup your claims. Unexplained or hard to explain events do not equal conspiracies.

And before I forget, go fuck yourself.

Sertes
05-02-2008, 08:07 AM
We can go back to unanswered questions as soon as you post PROOF/EVIDENCE to backup your claims. Unexplained or hard to explain events do not equal conspiracies.


I have nothing to add until you tell me what is the OFFICIAL version of why and how WTC7 fell on 9/11.
No difficult phyisical studies, no link to alternative version. Just the OFFICIAL version.

jimnyc
05-02-2008, 08:21 AM
I have nothing to add

And that's been apparent since the day you arrived here! :laugh2:

No facts, no proof, no evidence - you are dismissed.

Sertes
05-02-2008, 08:34 AM
And that's been apparent since the day you arrived here! :laugh2:

No facts, no proof, no evidence - you are dismissed.

hahaha now you're playing "cut the quote"
how low can a man go when his religion is questioned

I ask again: where's the official study explaining how and why WTC7 collapsed?

jimnyc
05-02-2008, 08:58 AM
hahaha now you're playing "cut the quote"
how low can a man go when his religion is questioned

I ask again: where's the official study explaining how and why WTC7 collapsed?

You're dismissed until you can start giving us some evidence. You've been a member for quite some time now and have posted this rubbish hundreds of times - and NOT ONE piece of hard evidence has been given by you. NOT ONE! How can it be that you can't come up with any evidence whatsoever to backup your claims?

I know why! Because you're a stupid little italian fucker! LOL

Sertes
05-02-2008, 10:06 AM
You're dismissed until you can start giving us some evidence. You've been a member for quite some time now and have posted this rubbish hundreds of times - and NOT ONE piece of hard evidence has been given by you. NOT ONE! How can it be that you can't come up with any evidence whatsoever to backup your claims?

I know why! Because you're a stupid little italian fucker! LOL

Sometimes I don't understand if you really don't grasp it, or you're simple cornered and clueless.
I told you from the beginning I can demonstrate the official version is fake, while providing an unproved alternative version that at least adhere to all objective evidence.

But no, that's not enough.
You must dismiss EVERYTHING.
You had about 20 chanches to tell me WHERE WAS DICK CHENEY AT 9:30, as this is IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL VERSION, as there are 2 opposite official versions in that issue.
That was the most "political" issue you could dig into, because after all this is "debate policy" and not "physics world" forum.
I can understand why you don't know anything on collapses so you just trust the establishment. But at least ONE POLITICAL ISSUE, look into one.
You tried with the Rumsfeld affair, but when papers proved you wrong... that was dodged aside like nothing.
Do you realize that according to you there was no one in charge that day?
Do you realize that according to you it's possible that after 2 hits on the towers a commercial plane could fly for 20 minutes straight toward the PENTAGON?!
Do you realize that WTC7 collapsed but your fancy governative experts didn't even create a fake explanation for it?
Why? Because that's not needed, as many of you TRUST BY FAITH rather than LOOK FOR FACTS.

jimnyc
05-02-2008, 10:15 AM
I already knew that Italy was one of the dumbest countries in the world, but you probably make the usual retards over there look somewhat "normal".

You've demonstrated NOTHING. Your evidence has been NOTHING. All you have offered this board is the same old repeated garbage that's already on thousands of sites that we have all laughed at hundreds of times already.

You're dismissed, dumb fuck.

Sertes
05-02-2008, 10:36 AM
You've demonstrated NOTHING. Your evidence has been NOTHING. All you have offered this board is the same old repeated garbage that's already on thousands of sites that we have all laughed at hundreds of times already.

Keep repeating that until you can sleep at night.
Keep repeating that "someone somewhere explained all that"

Good night, insulter.

Abbey
05-02-2008, 10:41 AM
Jim, I don't know how you let this guy continually post his contemptible lies about our country and this great tragedy. Let him do it in his own country (if anyone will listen), and at his own expense, not on your dime. :mad:

stang56k
05-02-2008, 10:56 PM
debunk this you blabbering fucks


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/58h0LjdMry0&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/58h0LjdMry0&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

stang56k
05-02-2008, 10:57 PM
Jim, I don't know how you let this guy continually post his contemptible lies about our country and this great tragedy. Let him do it in his own country (if anyone will listen), and at his own expense, not on your dime. :mad:

Your country...This is my country too and ill say whatever the fuck I want to say about it...There is this awesome thing called a first admendment.:finger3: Also us questioning our shitty government is not any less patriotic if that is what your implying.

stang56k
05-02-2008, 11:00 PM
BBC Reports Live that WTC7 has fallen, yet it still stands ROFL WTF YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS?


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ejjySUVOGKA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ejjySUVOGKA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

Dilloduck
05-02-2008, 11:09 PM
BBC Reports Live that WTC7 has fallen, yet it still stands ROFL WTF YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS?


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ejjySUVOGKA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ejjySUVOGKA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

BBC is stupid ?

Noir
05-02-2008, 11:28 PM
and so is CNN aswell it seems, as the video above shows reports of 7 'collapsed or collapsing' around 80 min before it did collapse, i'm not really one for conspiracy theories but certainly the first video raises some questions, especially at the end where there is quiet clearly some sort of explosion noise

Dilloduck
05-02-2008, 11:56 PM
and so is CNN aswell it seems, as the video above shows reports of 7 'collapsed or collapsing' around 80 min before it did collapse, i'm not really one for conspiracy theories but certainly the first video raises some questions, especially at the end where there is quiet clearly some sort of explosion noise

Media everywhere was jumping to conclusions based on sketchy evidence in a desperate effort explain what the hell was happening and be the first on the block with the scoop. The media are idiots yet you are going to use them as evidence of a conspiracy?

Noir
05-03-2008, 06:00 AM
Media everywhere was jumping to conclusions based on sketchy evidence in a desperate effort explain what the hell was happening and be the first on the block with the scoop

Oh yeah, i memo they did that a few years before aswell and ended up voting in the wrong president *D'oh*

But on a more serious note

The media are idiots yet you are going to use them as evidence of a conspiracy?

As i said in the above post it is the first movie that asks more questions, i accept the media can get things wrong, but its the people on the ground that where talking about it blowing up, it just seems wrong.

jimnyc
05-03-2008, 06:57 AM
debunk this you blabbering fucks


BBC Reports Live that WTC7 has fallen, yet it still stands ROFL WTF YOU HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS?

Are you seriously this stupid? BBC explained this a few hundred times since 9/11. The firemen and investigators on the scene knew the building was going to collapse, hence the fact they gave an order to "pull" the men from the building. They were monitoring the activity with electronic equipment and the entire building was actually shifting. The weight of one of the floors slowly collapsing actually formed a "bulge" on one side of the building.

While you have a live reporter on the news, you have 10 more behind the scenes chasing after the firemen and investigators. As all the information was being passed back and forth, an affiliate of the BBC (channel 24) went live first stating, erroneously, that the building had collapsed. BBC and CNN followed suit. Minutes later the building fell.

Or we could go with the story of you idiots - that whomever master minded these attacks was capable of keeping anyone from providing ANY credible proof of a conspiracy for 7 years. They kept every single person quiet about their devious plan. But they decided to tell the BBC new station ahead of time to add a little drama to the events. :lol:

jimnyc
05-03-2008, 07:00 AM
Your country...This is my country too and ill say whatever the fuck I want to say about it...There is this awesome thing called a first admendment.:finger3: Also us questioning our shitty government is not any less patriotic if that is what your implying.

We allow all points of view to be expressed here, even if they are from members with IQ's below retardation.

But don't bother tossing in the 1st amendment like it applies here. This is a privately owned board and you have no rights other than what the board owner gives you. Luckily for you he accepts slobbering fools tossing out idiotic statements.

Gaffer
05-03-2008, 08:37 AM
Your country...This is my country too and ill say whatever the fuck I want to say about it...There is this awesome thing called a first admendment.:finger3: Also us questioning our shitty government is not any less patriotic if that is what your implying.

She was referring to the italian sausage, not you nimble brains. And this is not your country. You hate it and everything and everyone in it. You might have rights but you don't have any respect. Go move in with the italian sausage your just taking up space here.

I fought for this country, but I didn't fight for the likes of you. You have your rights. They were given to you from birth. And like a spoiled rich kid you abuse them. Your an American because you were born here, not because you deserve to be one. Don't like it here? LEAVE!

There are plenty of real conspiracies the government is involved in. You should spend the time looking at those and not the made up bullshit of 9/11. There were plenty of after action conspiracies going on after 9/11 with people covering their asses. Your being steered away from the real conspiracies by the disinformation people. While your busy looking at what didn't happen your missing all the things that did happen. You hate America so much your willing to follow any numbskull that comes along with something bad to say about it.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 12:12 PM
Media everywhere was jumping to conclusions based on sketchy evidence in a desperate effort explain what the hell was happening and be the first on the block with the scoop. The media are idiots yet you are going to use them as evidence of a conspiracy?

But... you will believe the official story that the "media" has brought to you... Little ill logical and hypocritical in my opinion coupled with the statement above.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 12:20 PM
She was referring to the italian sausage, not you nimble brains. And this is not your country. You hate it and everything and everyone in it. You might have rights but you don't have any respect. Go move in with the italian sausage your just taking up space here.

I fought for this country, but I didn't fight for the likes of you. You have your rights. They were given to you from birth. And like a spoiled rich kid you abuse them. Your an American because you were born here, not because you deserve to be one. Don't like it here? LEAVE!

There are plenty of real conspiracies the government is involved in. You should spend the time looking at those and not the made up bullshit of 9/11. There were plenty of after action conspiracies going on after 9/11 with people covering their asses. Your being steered away from the real conspiracies by the disinformation people. While your busy looking at what didn't happen your missing all the things that did happen. You hate America so much your willing to follow any numbskull that comes along with something bad to say about it.

Assumptions, Assumptions... I don't hate America I hate what it has turned into due to the powers to be. I'm in the military, and it sickens me that I am directly involved in killing of innocent Iraqi children and women on false claims made up by our lying Government. How our credibility and respect around the world is destroyed. The American Dollar is being destroyed. The Constitution is being Destroyed. Bill of Rights is being destroyed. Our way of life is being destroyed. Sorry, if I'm a Little pissed off if those things are a little bit important to me.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 12:28 PM
Wow Americans are fuckin stupid

http://thetruthnews.info/bigtrouble.html

Gaffer
05-03-2008, 02:39 PM
Assumptions, Assumptions... I don't hate America I hate what it has turned into due to the powers to be. I'm in the military, and it sickens me that I am directly involved in killing of innocent Iraqi children and women on false claims made up by our lying Government. How our credibility and respect around the world is destroyed. The American Dollar is being destroyed. The Constitution is being Destroyed. Bill of Rights is being destroyed. Our way of life is being destroyed. Sorry, if I'm a Little pissed off if those things are a little bit important to me.

If your in the military do you mind sharing what branch, what you do and any other tidbits you care to point out.

A real live baby killer? And woman killer as well? Got me beat there, I was just called a baby killer. So how many babies and women did you kill? Kill any jihadists while you were at it?

I'm putting your credibility on the line here.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 03:03 PM
If your in the military do you mind sharing what branch, what you do and any other tidbits you care to point out.

A real live baby killer? And woman killer as well? Got me beat there, I was just called a baby killer. So how many babies and women did you kill? Kill any jihadists while you were at it?

I'm putting your credibility on the line here.

I'm in the Air Force, and do maintenances on the C-5 galaxy which transports the necessary tools, weapons and equipment to sustain the war. I have not been in combat directly but indirectly involved. So its a matter of perspective on the issue of involvement I have so go ahead and bash me for not being a grunt on the front lines actually doing the killing. I see my self as the Drug Dealer that supplies the substance to someone yet not directly destroying myself per say if you get my crummy analogy.

But all that aside when i joined the military the first part of the oath is protect the constitution that I cherish dearly, and I will do so to the death. So questioning a few politicians with their actions, motives, and antics doesn't seem as unpatriotic in the least, when they flirt with stepping on and undermining the constitution(which is more valuable and precious than any fuckin politician could ever think about being).

Sitarro
05-03-2008, 03:07 PM
Sorry, if 19 guys from the caves of afganistan with box cutters take over 4 full planes screaming "Durrka, Durrka, Durrka" while simultaneously disabling NORAD, and Fly airplanes at inmaneuverable speeds into buildings all in the name of Allah sounds far fetched to me.

2001 isn't today, people trapped on an aircraft being told there is a bomb on board were not going to try to disarm some lunatic that could detonate the bomb. Back then, hijackers didn't fly aircraft into buildings, they flew to Cuba. The pilots were trained to follow the directions of the hijackers to get the aircraft on the ground as quickl as possible, ground personnel would handle it from there.

These were U.S. airliners that had varied from their flight paths, not enemy aircraft. There are plenty of reasons NORAD would have experienced problems bringing these aircraft down.

I have 3 brothers who are Captains with a major airline, they have told me that it wouldn't be that difficult to do what they did as far as the flying. The 757 did hit the ground first before hitting the Pentagon so they weren't perfect.

As far as building 7, besides the fires and the falling debris that hit the building, there was the massive shock of 2 buildings over a hundred stories high falling next to it. Logic would tell you that the shock was as powerful as an earthquake on the foundation and structure of buildings around them.

Most of the silly conspiracy clowns don't even know that the Trade Center Towers were not built the way all other buildings were built at the time. Unlike the Empire State building that had I beams every 16 feet going to the roof, the vertical structure was the central core and the outer skin with very light space frames stretched between them, holding up thin concrete flooring. Once these space frames were weakened, the enormous weight above caused the pancake effect...... is that just too simple to understand?

Sitarro
05-03-2008, 03:19 PM
I'm in the Air Force, and do maintenances on the C-5 galaxy which transports the necessary tools, weapons and equipment to sustain the war. I have not been in combat directly but indirectly involved. So its a matter of perspective on the issue of involvement I have so go ahead and bash me for not being a grunt on the front lines actually doing the killing. I see my self as the Drug Dealer that supplies the substance to someone yet not directly destroying myself per say if you get my crummy analogy.

But all that aside when i joined the military the first part of the oath is protect the constitution that I cherish dearly, and I will do so to the death. So questioning a few politicians with their actions, motives, and antics doesn't seem as unpatriotic in the least, when they flirt with stepping on and undermining the constitution(which is more valuable and precious than any fuckin politician could ever think about being).

Most of the people I know, that would be asked what branch of service they were in, would respond with...... The United States Air Force. There is no s at the end of maintenance. Which variations of the C-5 do you perform maintenance on? Why did you join the armed service? Did you not know that the United States military kills people defending itself, it allies and it's people overseas? Quick...... where are you stationed, what squadron are you a member of, what command of the U. S. Air Force are you serving under?

Abbey
05-03-2008, 03:34 PM
She was referring to the italian sausage, not you nimble brains. And this is not your country. You hate it and everything and everyone in it. You might have rights but you don't have any respect. Go move in with the italian sausage your just taking up space here.

I fought for this country, but I didn't fight for the likes of you. You have your rights. They were given to you from birth. And like a spoiled rich kid you abuse them. Your an American because you were born here, not because you deserve to be one. Don't like it here? LEAVE!

There are plenty of real conspiracies the government is involved in. You should spend the time looking at those and not the made up bullshit of 9/11. There were plenty of after action conspiracies going on after 9/11 with people covering their asses. Your being steered away from the real conspiracies by the disinformation people. While your busy looking at what didn't happen your missing all the things that did happen. You hate America so much your willing to follow any numbskull that comes along with something bad to say about it.


You know, Gaffer, I would have thought it was fairly clear which poster I was talking about, but I guess reading comprehension is not on Stang's list of talents. Along with his inability to post without being foul. Nothing new for people of his political persuasion, though.

Awesome post, btw.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 03:37 PM
Most of the people I know, that would be asked what branch of service they were in, would respond with...... The United States Air Force. There is no s at the end of maintenance. Which variations of the C-5 do you perform maintenance on? Why did you join the armed service? Did you not know that the United States military kills people defending itself, it allies and it's people overseas? Quick...... where are you stationed, what squadron are you a member of, what command of the U. S. Air Force are you serving under?

There is only 2 variant of the C-5 A and B, and there is a prototype M model which is an engine and avionics upgrade modification. The C-5 is a cargo plane so that would leave only on command Which is the Air Mobility Command. I am not anti-war, I am anti-Iraq war, It was unconstitutional and based on the lie of WMDs. And I joined pre-Iraq war so...I'm not saying my squadron and where I'm stationed at for privacy reasons also anti-Terrorism purposes, LOL, sorry.

Kathianne
05-03-2008, 03:38 PM
You know, Gaffer, I would have thought it was fairly clear which poster I was talking about, but I guess reading comprehension is not on Stang's list of talents. Along with his inability to post without being foul. Nothing new for people of his political persuasion, though.

Awesome post, btw.

Like a little parrot I come and cackle, 'me too!' Tried to rep Gaffer, but no luck.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 03:41 PM
You know, Gaffer, I would have thought it was fairly clear which poster I was talking about, but I guess reading comprehension is not on Stang's list of talents. Along with his inability to post without being foul. Nothing new for people of his political persuasion, though.

Awesome post, btw.

No, I assumed it was a generalized comment at anyone who disagreed with the status quo.

What selective judgment you have to say i'm foul when I pail in comparison to some of the other peoples post in this thread.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 03:44 PM
You know, Gaffer, I would have thought it was fairly clear which poster I was talking about, but I guess reading comprehension is not on Stang's list of talents. Along with his inability to post without being foul. Nothing new for people of his political persuasion, though.

Awesome post, btw.

Wow and she gave me bad rep for cursing when the owner of this board had me beat by a hundred fold on the curse words.... Talk about being bias.....:lame2:

No offense to you Jimmyc....I just thought we were having a debate....

Abbey
05-03-2008, 03:46 PM
No, I assumed it was a generalized comment at anyone who disagreed with the status quo.

What selective judgment you have to say i'm foul when I pail in comparison to some of the other peoples post in this thread.

You would do well to read rather than assume.

As for my "judgment", no selectivity was needed on my part. You have the distinction of being the only person who in this thread who cursed at me.

Gaffer
05-03-2008, 04:09 PM
I'm in the Air Force, and do maintenances on the C-5 galaxy which transports the necessary tools, weapons and equipment to sustain the war. I have not been in combat directly but indirectly involved. So its a matter of perspective on the issue of involvement I have so go ahead and bash me for not being a grunt on the front lines actually doing the killing. I see my self as the Drug Dealer that supplies the substance to someone yet not directly destroying myself per say if you get my crummy analogy.

But all that aside when i joined the military the first part of the oath is protect the constitution that I cherish dearly, and I will do so to the death. So questioning a few politicians with their actions, motives, and antics doesn't seem as unpatriotic in the least, when they flirt with stepping on and undermining the constitution(which is more valuable and precious than any fuckin politician could ever think about being).

I guess when your enlistment is up you'll be getting out then.

So you haven't killed anybody, either directly or indirectly. But your quick to paint all the troops as baby killers when you haven't experienced anything for yourself. A regular john kerry you are.

I don't bash anyone for doing their job in the military. Everyone doing their job is what makes it all work. But referring to yourself as a baby killer because you load supplies to the troops on the line is really low. I can respect your service, but I don't respect you. When you salute an officer you salute the rank not the man.

You know nothing about air traffic control, you know nothing about NORAD, you know nothing about building architectures, you know nothing about the training the hijackers had to take over and fly the planes they hijacked, you know nothing about explosives and detonators, you know nothing about the procedures that were in place at the time for the pilots of hijacked planes. Yet your quick to jump on the conspiracy band wagon just because a few people claim to be experts and say it was an inside job.

I can add you know nothing about combat, you know nothing about baghdad or iraq except what you hear on the news, you know nothing about saddam or any of the goings on leading up to the war. In fact you know very little about anything.

I'll give you some facts. There were WMD materials found in iraq. Labs for making them and shells ready for them to be put into. The stuff was there and ready to start production which could have been completed in a couple of months. The last convoy of trucks into syria was allowed to leave. Our forces weren't to fire on them, why not? My guess is it contained all the russian advisor's that had been working for saddam. The completed WMD's went into syria. If Bush lied to get us into a war why didn't he plant WMD's in iraq? It would have been easy to do.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 04:59 PM
I guess when your enlistment is up you'll be getting out then.

So you haven't killed anybody, either directly or indirectly. But your quick to paint all the troops as baby killers when you haven't experienced anything for yourself. A regular john kerry you are.

I don't bash anyone for doing their job in the military. Everyone doing their job is what makes it all work. But referring to yourself as a baby killer because you load supplies to the troops on the line is really low. I can respect your service, but I don't respect you. When you salute an officer you salute the rank not the man.

You know nothing about air traffic control, you know nothing about NORAD, you know nothing about building architectures, you know nothing about the training the hijackers had to take over and fly the planes they hijacked, you know nothing about explosives and detonators, you know nothing about the procedures that were in place at the time for the pilots of hijacked planes. Yet your quick to jump on the conspiracy band wagon just because a few people claim to be experts and say it was an inside job.

I can add you know nothing about combat, you know nothing about baghdad or iraq except what you hear on the news, you know nothing about saddam or any of the goings on leading up to the war. In fact you know very little about anything.

I'll give you some facts. There were WMD materials found in iraq. Labs for making them and shells ready for them to be put into. The stuff was there and ready to start production which could have been completed in a couple of months. The last convoy of trucks into syria was allowed to leave. Our forces weren't to fire on them, why not? My guess is it contained all the russian advisor's that had been working for saddam. The completed WMD's went into syria. If Bush lied to get us into a war why didn't he plant WMD's in iraq? It would have been easy to do.

Putting words in my mouth when have I ever directed any negative words towards the military its self, just the politicians.. They are only following orders from people that have more authority then them. I think the authority and policy is wrong. Capitol Hill and the White House is where the problem lies.

Gaffer
05-03-2008, 06:20 PM
Putting words in my mouth when have I ever directed any negative words towards the military its self, just the politicians.. They are only following orders from people that have more authority then them. I think the authority and policy is wrong. Capitol Hill and the White House is where the problem lies.

I didn't put words in your mouth. You described yourself as a babies and women killer. Thereby implying all military people are baby and woman killers. You left out rape and terrorizing the country side. You have made negative remarks about the military in other threads.

I don't see pride in your country in your posts, I see disdain and disrespect.

iraq is a front in a much larger war. A war that is being incompetently handled on many levels. The media and politicians are afraid to say it, but, we are at war with islam. You are a part of that war. It's going to go on for a very long time. It's been going on since 1979. It will be going on after the next president is elected.

Mr. P
05-03-2008, 06:55 PM
I didn't put words in your mouth. You described yourself as a babies and women killer. Thereby implying all military people are baby and woman killers. You left out rape and terrorizing the country side. You have made negative remarks about the military in other threads.

I don't see pride in your country in your posts, I see disdain and disrespect.

iraq is a front in a much larger war. A war that is being incompetently handled on many levels. The media and politicians are afraid to say it, but, we are at war with islam. You are a part of that war. It's going to go on for a very long time. It's been going on since 1979. It will be going on after the next president is elected.

Maybe you do..and it's not the USA..I've been reading this trolls chit and it's full of holes. His English sentence structure sucks for someone supposedly working on C-5s in the United States Air Foece. His excuse for not telling where he is or what unit he's in because of "privacy reasons also anti-Terrorism purposes" is also BS. You can't hide a C-5 operational base. Not to mention that his commitment would be over by now IF he had joined prior to 9-11.

My guess is this troll isn't American at all.

stang56k
05-03-2008, 07:14 PM
Maybe you do..and it's not the USA..I've been reading this trolls chit and it's full of holes. His English sentence structure sucks for someone supposedly working on C-5s in the United States Air Foece. His excuse for not telling where he is or what unit he's in because of "privacy reasons also anti-Terrorism purposes" is also BS. You can't hide a C-5 operational base. Not to mention that his commitment would be over by now IF he had joined prior to 9-11.

My guess is this troll isn't American at all.

Lol heres a conspiracy theory for you...

Your right theres only 7 conus C-5 bases, I'm not hiding anything cept my location lol. Dover AFB, Travis AFB, Stewart ANG (Newburgh, New York), West Virgina ANG (Martinsburg),Tennessee ANG (Memphis), Lackland ARC, and Westover ARC . Now, wtf does this have an relevance to the topic at hand? I enlisted 6 years speculator, its over next June. Also i said pre iraq war kid... not 9/11.

So you cant debunk 9/11 so you have to debunk me? seriously?

stang56k
05-03-2008, 07:16 PM
I didn't put words in your mouth. You described yourself as a babies and women killer. Thereby implying all military people are baby and woman killers. You left out rape and terrorizing the country side. You have made negative remarks about the military in other threads.

I don't see pride in your country in your posts, I see disdain and disrespect.

iraq is a front in a much larger war. A war that is being incompetently handled on many levels. The media and politicians are afraid to say it, but, we are at war with islam. You are a part of that war. It's going to go on for a very long time. It's been going on since 1979. It will be going on after the next president is elected.

Your wrong the Islamic/Christian duel had been going on since the Crusades.

Mr. P
05-03-2008, 07:21 PM
Lol heres a conspiracy theory for you...

Your right theres only 7 conus C-5 bases, I'm not hiding anything cept my location lol. Dover AFB, Travis AFB, Stewart ANG (Newburgh, New York), West Virgina ANG (Martinsburg),Tennessee ANG (Memphis), Lackland ARC, and Westover ARC . Now, wtf does this have an relevance to the topic at hand? I enlisted 6 years speculator, its over next June. Also i said pre iraq war kid... not 9/11.

So you cant debunk 9/11 so you have to debunk me? seriously?

No, you've done that all by yourself.

Gaffer
05-03-2008, 07:43 PM
Your wrong the Islamic/Christian duel had been going on since the Crusades.

To be factual it's been going on since mohammad first was inspired to write his novel. The war we are dealing with has existed since 1979. Before that was just the prelude.

n0spam4me
03-22-2009, 08:01 PM
This is clearly a case of the emperor has no clothes!

Just like in the kids storybook, there are a LOT of people admiring the emperors new suit, but the unfortunate reality is ... the emperor is NAKED!

WAKE UP AMERICA!