9/11 Official Conspiracy Theory Questions

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Dec 9, 2016.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I thought it might be interesting to start a thread where posters can ask questions about the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) and discuss those questions. To review, the vast majority of the OCT is contained in the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports. This thread is not restricted to anyone's particular beliefs about what happened on 9/11 although I personally would like to read significant questions from those who spend most of their time in this section of the forum defending the OCT, if any actually have questions.

    To start, I am posting a link to the document titled:

    Family Steering Committee Questions to the 9/11 Commission

    http://www.911truth.org/images/resources/Family_Steering_Cmte-review_of_Report.pdf

    Your questions are of course not limited to those within the above document and your questions should NOT be directed at alternate theories, it's strictly for the OCT. Obviously, there may not be any available answer to your question(s) either but it's all up for discussion.
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The silence in this thread speaks for itself. My point is made.
     
  3. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,813
    Likes Received:
    2,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Those with sufficient curiosity to ask questions and think for themselves likely already understand the deception inherent in the official story.

    Those in denial will never ask questions.
     
  4. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    What is your opinion of the Citizens Investigative Team and the evidence they presented?
     
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Read the title of this thread and the first post, you're off topic.
     
  6. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,813
    Likes Received:
    2,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The evidence gathered and presented by CIT helps demonstrate the failure of the official narrative regarding what happened at the pentagon that day.
     
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So then the suggested OCT questions should be:

    1. Why didn't the official investigation (which never really existed) question those particular eyewitnesses who contradict the flight path as officially claimed?
    2. Why does the flight path indicated by those eyewitnesses differ substantially and significantly from the officially claimed flight path?
     
  8. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    You accept their evidence?
     
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What CIT did was what the official investigation should have done. Gather ALL eyewitness testimony, thoroughly interview the eyewitnesses objectively and follow up on their claims. No one has to accept or deny eyewitness claims, they are part of any and all investigations. You question CIT and posters but ask not one question about the OCT, you're still off topic. Why don't you start a thread that asks questions about everyone and and anything that's not part of the OCT or disagrees with it, that would be right up your alley, this thread is not it and I didn't create it for that purpose.
     
  10. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,813
    Likes Received:
    2,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes I do.

    Their method of collection and analysis far exceeds collection and analysis of anything the government has done. I found the witnesses to be honest and persuasive. That is, they told what they saw. It was an honest accounting of what they saw, with no agenda or bias. Their witnesses were far more honest and believable than any witness from the pentagon that appeared before the 911 Commission.
     
  11. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Strange how you accept their “evidence” with no sworn statements from their supposed interviewed parties, their “experts” or any other form of chain of custody.
     
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean like what the 9/11 Commission did with the Bush and Cheney interviews? There are no experts or chain of custody when it comes to interviewing eyewitnesses.

    What kind of nonsense are you posting? Why haven't you asked that question about the Bush and Cheney interviews? That would have been on topic, the above is still not it, get a clue.
     
  13. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Except William Lagasse, right Eleuthera?

    :wink:
     
  14. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So there are all the CIT witnesses that saw the flight path of a 757 headed towards the Pentagon in a low trajectory and not one witness of that 757 pulling up OVER the Pentagon at the last second...

    What happened to that 757 those credible, honest, CIT witnesses saw?
     
  15. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong thread. Do you have any questions about the OCT? I didn't start this thread for the purpose of OCT defenders (or anyone) to question everything other than the OCT. Start your own thread if that's your objective.
     
  16. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Sure there is.

    You get a sworn statement with their signature. Then you have it notarized. Happens every day in the real world bub.
     
  17. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The usual nonsense ... bub.

    1. That never happened with the Bush and Cheney interviews. You seem to demand it of random eyewitnesses but don't bother to question why it was never done in the real world with the most responsible parties ... bub.
    2. That has nothing to do with experts or chain of custody when interviewing eyewitnesses in a non-official setting in the real world ... bub.

    You're still off topic, as usual in this real world ... bub.
     
  18. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    6,813
    Likes Received:
    2,395
    Trophy Points:
    113

    The way the commission handled the testimony of Willy Rodriguez provides the insight, IMO.

    His testimony was taken behind closed doors, the testimony contradicted the official story, and the final report did not make any reference to his testimony.
     
  19. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Rodriguez also claims he gave the 9/11 Commission a list of eyewitnesses who could corroborate his testimony and not one was interviewed. The 9/11 Commission Report also does not include anything about Norman Mineta's testimony either. So much for any legitimacy. But you see, still not one OCT question from any OCT defender but always trying to question OCT skeptics.
     
  20. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    85
    Trophy Points:
    48
    William changed and embellished his story regarding what he saw and heard as time went on. It got more dramatic with each telling.
     
  21. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Whether that's true or not the fact remains that the 9/11 Commission did not interview any of the potentially corroborating eyewitnesses named by Rodriguez. The key OCT questions then should be why the **** not? And why the **** was his testimony totally ignored? Yet another example of questioning anything other than the OCT, which is of course contrary to this thread topic's purpose.

    I don't believe OCT defenders posting in this thread realize that each of their posts ALWAYS generates one or more obvious OCT questions, one they have yet to ask.
     
  22. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Never made the claim that it happened on the B/C interviews.

    You said (for some reason) that there is, "There are no experts or chain of custody when it comes to interviewing eyewitnesses." I was commenting that if you are going to present evidence, you can get sworn statements from the eyewitnesses. As Truthers are quick to point out; videos and voices can be faked as I'm sure you would claim that the phone calls from the planes were all faked if you were asked. The CIT presented no such sworn statements; just videos. Who knows if they doctored the voices or not? Who knows what coaching was involved, what was edited in or out. Sworn notarized statements above one's signature are the only way.

    And this is the same demands you make of the Government so why not make the demands of the CIT? Obviously you have a double standard.
    [/QUOTE]
     
  23. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    They also didn't interview those two green aliens from the Simpsons. They should have. Each one has more credibility than Willy.

    Here is the janitor with a set of stethoscopes around his neck.

    https://kendoc911.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/normaraewillyactor.jpg

    Lotsa fun, you guys are.
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,196
    Likes Received:
    1,123
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I never said you did, I said you don't question it.

    The "some reason" was that YOU brought it up.

    Yeah you can, you are quick. So? And I said they didn't do that with the two war criminals, why the **** not? I also said you don't question that. Are we going in circles?

    Non sequitur.

    Are you serious? A key portion of the 9/11 Commission Report is supported by a third party transmission of a "confession" signed by a detainee who wasn't allowed to read what he signed. This is the CIA (aka the US government) presenting "evidence", a "sworn notarized statement" to the 9/11 Commission. Considering the Senate Committee on Torture claimed that torture (and that's what they called it, not the "enhanced interrogation" term created for morons) yielded no useful information, where does that leave the 9/11 Commission and their report? That's an OCT QUESTION, one you would never have the stones to ask. And that leads to yet another OCT question. Why the **** did these cowards on the 9/11 Commission go through with that charade?

    I'm not interested in prosecuting CIT. This thread is not about CIT, get a clue.

    Obviously you still have no clue what the purpose of this thread is but you still manage to serve my purpose. So thanks for your help.
     
  25. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Still wondering why you demand such a high level of official conduct from the 9/11 Commission and demand zero official conduct at all from the CIT. The double standard is clear.
     

Share This Page