PENTTBOM doesn't contain any documentation of explosives testing and also we have covered this before and you urged me to file a freedom of information act request, however, if it takes filing a freedom of information act request for this, how is it that you allegedly know that explosives were tested for and came up negative?
You could start with the FBI page on their efforts: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/ten-years-after-the-fbi-since-9-11/by-the-numbers then move on to the burn videos (via FOIA) on this page: http://conspiraciesrnotus.blogspot.com/2010/12/nist-tested-bomb-demolition-hypotheses.html Then get serious as a researcher: contact them directly with what you want and ask for it. You have the freedom to do so. Happy viewing!
I submit to you, that the data doesn't exist if the people peddling the suicidal Arab hijackers story were so interested in getting the TRUTH out, they would be willing to provide very specific links to data and even page numbers within specific documents, however, the fact is, the "data" doesn't exist. If you personally have seen the INFORMATION you could provide a document ID and link and page number where the INFORMATION is to be found, but you don't, because you are not really interested in the TRUTH, you are playing a game here. The whole argument boils down to > is so >> is NOT > is so >> is NOT .............. its the way I said it is because I said so! so there! what a crock! Evidence indeed, The Video of WTC 1, 2 & 7 "collapsing" tells it all, but there are those who refuse to see...... whatever ......
From my reading of the material available in these "LINKS" there isn't anything that speaks of either the recovery of physical evidence proving that any airliner was ever at any of the crash sites and also, no data on any alleged testing for explosive or explosive residue. First I get told that I must instigate a Freedom of Information act request for INFORMATION, and later I'm told that the data exists in links that you have posted, but really WHERE IS IT? if you have a specific page of a given report to cite, go for it, however sending me to a link where NOTHING indicates that it has any data about physical evidence collection and identification, or explosives residue testing...... what is going on around here? Like I said, if the people who are so supportive of the radical Arab hijackers story had real INFORMATION why do they play games about providing it?
Freedom of Information Act - what have you requested directly from the source? You continue to whine about the lack of information, but you haven't done anything to acquire it.
you allege to have INFORMATION and fail to present it. previous links that you have posted, have NOT presented ANY data at all about the subject(s) that we were discussing.
They were full of information. The trick is: You have to read it. The question to you is: In your search for information, what documents have you requested from the FBI via FOIA?
You really don't get how incredibly bad this looks for the "debunker" side of the argument, countless times I've asked for INFORMATION only to be handed links that either simply do not work, or do not provide the desired INFORMATION, the "debunker" side is allegedly in possession of INFORMATION that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that 19 suicidal Arabs flew total of 4 airliners and crashed 3 of them into buildings. HOWEVER, what data is it that is the compelling evidence, and will you share with the forum what convinced you that the hijacked airliners story is the real deal?
The "debunker" side alleges to have INFORMATION however when I check out the links posted here, there is NO data about the subject at hand .... note that a link to "NTSB report, "Flight Path Study- " when the subject at hand is the physical evidence of any airliner actually having been at any of the 4 sites. what am I to believe? If you can not produce a link to a document that actually has the data, then just say so... don't try to run me around in circles and try to make it look like I'm not doing enough to find the data, if the debunker side is in possession of this data, then lets see it (?)
You seem to be the only one unable or unwilling to read through the links supplied. Also: what documents have you asked the FBI for via FOIA? I know I asked before but perhaps you missed the question. Surely someone so intent on the "truth" has obtained all of the reports available?
And where are the page numbers and specific links to the data that supports YOUR assertions and claims? Here are just two. 1. Where are your links to the data saying that the planes could NOT handle the speeds and manuvuers that the planes encountered? 2. Where are your links to the data showing that the planes COULDN'T have penetrated the perimeter facade?
So, in other words, the "DATA" doesn't exist and we are left with interpretations based on what we see, and the debunker side would like to believe that the destruction of WTC7 doesn't look like a Controlled Demolition..... you can think what you like, but I know what I saw, and I'm in good company, I would much rather attend a party with David Chandler that the likes of Dr. Sunder.
Looks can be decieving..seems you're basing your notion that 7 was a 'controlled demolition' on the assumption that it couldn't be anything else
Not an "assumption" its about seeing the exact same thing that one sees with a controlled demolition, not to mention the total destruction of WTC7 ( not even a staircase left..... ) Some people refuse to even recognize the significance of the destruction. the fact is that things do not get totally destroyed, unless somebody panned it that way, and don't tell me that the hijackers planned to totally destroy the towers......
So first the debunker side insists that the "collapse" looks nothing like a Controlled Demolition, and then shifts to "buildings do that all the time....."
