http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/624-frequently-asked-questions.html This is an encapsulation of some common questions folks have about the demolition of the towers. The objective mind should be able to gain insight into what really happened that day. All of these answers have to be wrong in order for the "official" BS story to be true. Enjoy.
Funny. The very first "answer" they give is "we don't know". For a direct rebuttal of Gage's lies, see www.ae911truth.info
Yet another spam thread, RWAF? You do know that is against the ToS, right? Funny how you try to promote a site who's lies you can't even defend.
Spam? Why no Sir..I had the best of intentions wanting to educate my open minded, intelligent co posters. I don't expect shills to acknowledge anything other than disinformation.
Starting threads pointing to the same site over and over again is spam regardless of how much you worship those liars, frauds and disgusting "people". BTW, WHAT co-posters? The only other truther who posts now is your cheerleader. Truthers are a dying breed. Either they are growing up or eventually the truth sinks in.
No, they did that themselves. We didn't force them to break the rules or expose themselves as sock puppets. Dishonest people generally get themselves banned through their dishonest posts. Or is this an accusation you really want to drag the mods into? We could see who reports who more often, but we both know you wouldn't like the answer. But hey, look at the bright side! It could be yet another ridiculous conspiracy theory you could promote until you went to far insulting the mods....
I wasn't referring to the mods. I was referring to the shills who manipulate.....things. How'd you pull the Sunday shift???
Same site over and over? You mean like the "official" BS report (the ONLY "official" accounting of the incident we have to go on)? Over and over? Hey...why use multiple sites when one does a great job of assembling the facts all by themselves? They do the research, the intelligent reader saves time.
If they are the end all be all, once would be enough. Unfortunately for truthers, AE911truth is less credible than most truthtard sites. They can't defend their own claims any better than you can, which is to say not at all. You would think so many true engineers would be able to actually put together some proof that it was a controlled demolition. After all, engineering is a science, not opinion. How many years have they been a laughing stock and still no such report? A shame you put so much stock in such an utter failure of a group of retards.
So now you're making the accusation that the mods have allowed themselves to be manipulated by us "shills"? Wow. I bet they would love to know they are being accused of being so manipulated. Unless, of course, you're claiming we've hacked the site and are banning people without the knowledge of the mods. You should really report these spurious claims to the site administrator so he can check in on it and let you know what he finds. Want me to do it for you? You go down a really slippery slope when you start lying about mods.
Scientists and architects they are indeed, and they have a much different opinion of the evidence. Name calling is typical when all else fails though, I know.
The retaliatory responses from the team would detract from the issue. I'm not talking about the mods. Don't put words in my mouth either. We both know what's up here...Now please let's get back to the topic, shall we? 9/11 was an inside job. Can you prove it wasn't?
So if they are truly scientists, why have they not come forward with proof of their claims? Is it normal for scientists to make claims and then scurry like the cockroaches they are when the light of truth comes on? I didn't think so. They are cockroaches, not scientists.
I already said you weren't talking about the mods, but you WERE talking about we "shills" manipulating you truthers into getting yourselves banned. Care to explain how we did that? Remember, don't insult the mods by pretending they've been manipulated. I am just clarifying your post. I've already been talking about 9/11 and have proven it wasn't an inside job. A shame you run away from that truth. Care to stand up for your theories for a change? Want to actually back them up instead of running away? I would love to see that!
Name calling once again. They're not running....in fact, I believe they all have information on their respective websites. You can go there if you're really searching for the truth. I'm sure you can email them as well. Do you need phone numbers?
I've been to their web site. I see no evidence. I see no engineering papers proving their points. Care to link where they have evidence and the proof I am asking about? I don't need to email them. If they are too ashamed of their work to post it, they sure wouldn't give me a copy of it.
I feel exactly the same way about the many fantastic stories of jets going the wrong way, jets were launched, no, they weren't launched. Bouncing engines and daredevil dives by a failed Cessna pilot to hover just above grass top level, changing timelines, lies, lies, and more lies.
Repeating your same bull(*)(*)(*)(*) lies over and over again, especially when everyone has seen you get your ass handed to you by the truth, only makes your lies seem more pathetic and sad. Why is it you can't back up your claims? Because even you know they are bull(*)(*)(*)(*).
I noticed you chose not to address any of the odd things concerning jets not patrolling the skies, or the failed Cessna pilot that hovered above the grass before it disappeared into the Pentagon...Poof! It's MAGIC!! Plane gone from sight! Or bouncing engines out of softened earth several football fields away. I got plenty more points, so feel free to jump in at any time.
Who was a failed Cessna pilot? None of the highjackers were failed Cessna pilots. None of the planes 'hovered' anywhere: planes don't hover. You're making false claims.
I am?? Where? Anything else specific and on point that you would like to discuss in a reasonable and respectful fashion?
Respectfully: There is no hijacker named "Hanji". None of the hijackers were failed Cessna pilots. Can you back up either of these claims of yours?
