"Who had the means, motive, and opportunity" to carry out 9/11?

Discussion in '9/11' started by cjnewson88, Jan 29, 2014.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    did they follow up with any investigative reporting? ... have you seen any interviews with them? ...
     
  2. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, but according to the BBC and other reports, the men who were falsely identified as hijackers gave interviews, which would likely be in a language that I do not speak or understand.

    So again, is it your belief that the BBC and other media outlets completely made all of this up? And do you have evidence for your conspiracy theory?
     
  3. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    No videos, no photos, no interviews. Unless you care to find one Jango? You'd be the first.
     
  4. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What was that you were saying to Bob not that long ago, something along the lines of putting in work to figure this stuff out, you know, searching for information/FOIA requests/etc. I don't mind doing searches for you, but if you've been wanting to see this stuff for yourself for a while now apparently, what have you done yourself to find it?
     
  5. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I've done my searching through any online article and video which shows an 'alive hijacker' giving an interview. The only results were conspiracy sites linked to the same BBC article and youtube videos beating the same line. The only thing to go on is the one BBC article. There are no sources listed on it, just "some middle eastern newspapers" and so no where to even attempt to contact. Furthermore the update to the article clearly states it supersedes the first article with all the correct names, so what much more needs to be done?

    Meanwhile conspiracy theorists have been believing it for years when there is no evidence to support it.
     
  6. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Except for the fact that there are numerous reports (not just from the BBC) about this. By all accounts from the government and from what the media has reported, there was a lot the government did not know about al Qaeda and their plot, which is the alleged reason why the attacks were not discovered and prevented. So why does the government not knowing the true identities of the hijackers come as a surprise then? Why is stolen identities such a controversy? What evidence do you have that the below report is not accurate:

    Who is lying here CJ?
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You know how that works, research is only useful when it supports the Official Conspiracy Theory, everything else is discarded/ignored as "whacko conspiracy theory".
     
  8. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since engaging with these types online about this subject material, I've often wondered if they're addicts to medicine like Bayer Back & Body because of the outrageous spine-twisting contortions they undergo to defend their desired POV.
     
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Assuming a poster is not a paid shill and not a cognitive dissonant type, what other reason(s) would motivate someone to defend the OCT daily and never question any of it or at least not spend even a tiny fraction of time questioning some aspect of the OCT? I just don't see the purpose/benefit. Yet I see this going on all the time for some in many forums.
     
  10. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Perhaps rose-colored glasses, partisanship or statism. If they fall under cognitive dissonance, then I don't know.
     
  11. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't know, I can't imagine that kind of one-sided mentality.

    I left out the cognitive dissonant type because I just don't see such a person spending nearly every day defending the OCT and never questioning any of it. I can see that happening on occasion but not with such extreme frequency.
     
  12. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Which leaves astroturfing and sock puppets then.
     
  13. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    whatever that means ...
     
  14. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    And yet can you find a single source that show the actual interviews with these 'alive hijackers'?
     
  15. Blues63

    Blues63 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    You have to love the truther rhetoric. The naiveté is cute.
     
  16. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Periphery responses, huh CJ? I thought you were better...
     
  17. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Is it wrong to ask for evidence? You seem to think some of the hijackers showed up alive, so I'm asking you to find me an interview with even one of them.
     
  18. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/10/911_conspiracy_theory_1.html
     
  19. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    13,625
    Likes Received:
    11,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, it was AQ. Mountains of evidence points to them.
     
  20. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you're going with the guy they mentioned in their first report as being a liar then. Of course you are. And it's the line at the bottom of that article that does it for you, isn't it? That the F.B.I. is confident that they're right.

    But the link you provided clears nothing up. Nada.
     
  21. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Is it wrong for you to look for yourself? You chastised Bob for not putting in the effort. Lo and behold, here you are not a week later doing the very same thing. The guy is a Saudi, perhaps start your extensive search in their media archives? And you've still failed to answer the question of the man in the first BBC article. Was he lying his ass off? Heard his name but saw a different picture and said. "Hey, no one will notice since all of us Arabs look alike anyway." I mean, come on CJ, get real.


    How could they show up alive? They crashed planes, did they not? No, what I'm saying is identities were stolen and the F.B.I. and anyone else in the U.S. Government doesn't have a clue to the true identity of the hijackers. And again, these men were mentioned in the BBC article as giving interviews. If you can't find said interviews yourself, call up the BBC and ask them about it. Why must I do your work for you?
     
  22. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Still waiting for you to link that interview Jango.

    I've done my searching, I found nothing. All evidence supports that all 19 hijackers are correctly named and dead on impact.

    If you're trying to promote a new theory then you better have the evidence to support it. That's how it works.

    I'm not going to spend my time chasing ghosts trying to disprove something that isn't true. If you want to prove it, prove it.
     
  23. Shinebox

    Shinebox Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Messages:
    3,473
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the BBC corrected their report ... do a little more research next time ... there is more out there confirming that all the terrorists you truthers claim are alive and well are indeed dead ... unless you have an interview with any of them? ...
     
  24. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So the men the media highlighted in the aftermath, with the same name and pictures as the hijackers identified by the F.B.I. as the culprits, are compulsive and delusional liars? And can you quit squirming for just one post and address what I've actually asked you, please.

    1. No, they did not. They can't retroactively correct what they, and others, reported.

    2. Since English is not apparently working with you, what other language do I need to use before comprehension begins? Seriously, what is the f'n hurdle here for you? Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization known for forging identification and travel documents. Why is it so incomprehensible that the hijackers they sent to America to conduct 9/11 stole the identities they used?
     
  25. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    48
    It's not incomprehensible, there's just no evidence to support that they did, aside from an uncited BBC article from 12 days after the attacks.
     

Share This Page