Not sure where the complaining is centered since I proved my claim using the exact same method and link you said proved yours. I didn't think you could prove they were all in al qaeda.
Save goobermint players at any cost. That's the job at hand. Confuse, dilute, refocus, insult, and then call in the team to finish him off. Great work. Very organized. A tribute to your skilled leadership Hannity.
Do truthers feel confused, diluted, and finished off? Maybe it doesn't have anything to do with government posters.
And I refuted your claim. You've failed completely at responding to the refutation. You've failed completely at addressing the questions given to you. Know what that means in debate? It means you've lost.
I did read it. I asked you specific questions about it and guided you to the pertinent parts that back up my claims and prove yours false. You failed miserably and completely by ignoring the questions and being unable to give even the simplest details about your claim. Making vague claims you can't back up isn't exactly good for building credibility or reputation, is it. Seriously. Do you think ANYONE is fooled by the silly games in your posts? Your posts PROVE you have nothing, you know the evidence exists, but are attempting to save some amount of face through deception. It isn't working. Just to drive the point home, the 9/11 commission report details the recruitment, history, movements, and backgrounds for all the hijackers. Most of this information is contained in chapter 7 which is dedicated solely to the hijackers. It is your claim the 9/11 commission report has insufficient evidence. You were asked to explain your claim of insufficient evidence. You could not. You were asked to point out specifics. You could not. You were asked to point out which hijackers you believed were not linked to Al Qaeda. You could not. Sounds like an epic failure on your part. Care to explain yourself?
Just because you can't prove they were all in al qaeda it doesn't mean make long useless posts that don't get read.
Hey Fangbeer, here is a little common sense help so you don't make more false accusations. When you edit someone's post all that person has to do is notice their post was not honestly quoted by......looking at their post that was edited during quoting. It doesn't mean one has to read the useless words you've posted in response.
Thanks for proving my point and thanks for proving you don't actually read people's posts. Anyone else doubt that truthers are not here for debate but to try and push bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories they can't back up? Anyone? Anyone? Didn't think so.
AAAAAND once again your post has failed on an epic scale. One can take part of a post to emphasize the part they are talking about. If taking that one piece out changes the meaning, that is dishonest. As Fangbeer pointed out, his posting of the pertinent parts of your post did not change the meaning of your post. Truthers will use any excuse to not have to address their dishonesty in their posts.
Don't need to read a whole post to see no citations of evidence. Your inability to prove your claim is your fault.
Editing a post to remove related information is called hack quoting. But apparently your camp does this so often on every piece of information you come across that you can't even tell the difference anymore. You honestly quoted my post but fully and completely failed to comprehend the point.
The lack of comprehension isn't with me. What Fangbeer did was remove information that was not relevant to the point he was making , did not change the point he was making, and would have made for a more confusing post. All you've done is whine incessantly about it. You haven't shown how the other part of your post changed Fangbeer's point in any way. If you could have done that, you would actually have a point. But you don't. So you lose. Again.
I cited your source. Repeatedly. Apparently you missed that in your eagerness to not read the post. So I will ask again: It is your claim the 9/11 commission report lacks evidence that the hijackers were members of Al Qaeda. I pointed you to chapter 7 and asked you specific questions. Please explain your claim of insufficient evidence. What evidence is missing from the 9/11 report specifically that you feel should have been there. Which hijackers do you believed were not linked sufficiently to Al Qaeda in the 9/11 commission report. Now, are you here to debate or to troll? Answering the questions honestly shows you are here to debate. Whining repeatedly about lack of citation when the citation is clearly there as the 9/11 commission report is trolling which is a violation of the TOS.
More evidence: Evidence: FBI Penttbom investigation. Similar investigations & conclusions (complete with official public statements) by the UN, The European Union, NATO, and the governments of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Netherlands, Philippine, Russia, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, UK, and the US. Oh yeah, and acknowledged by al Qaeda, too.
Yes. I have. Chapter 7 of the 9/11 commission report. It is all there. You've yet to say a single word that refutes what is there. All you've done is pretend nothing has been presented to you and play games. And thanks for proving you're only here to troll.
Your camp has utterly failed to grasp the fundamental problem with al qaeda. How do you know when someone is or is not part of al qaeda without the government telling you or anonymous internet postings?
How about videos of Osama and other Al Qaeda leaders extolling the virtues of the 19 hijackers? Why hasn't a single member of Al Qaeda stepped forward and claimed the hijackers WEREN'T part of Al Qaeda? Yes, we know truthers are so mentally jacked up that they refuse to believe anything the government says just because the government says it, but the rest of us aren't that f'ed up crazy. And like I've said and proven repeatedly, truthers ignore the evidence before them. They have all kinds of excuses, but what it boils down to is truthers ignore anything and everything that refutes their absolutely retarded claims while extolling the virtues of any fact that might conceivably support their claims EVEN WHEN IT IS FROM THE SAME SOURCE!!! What a bunch of hypocrites! So go ahead and troll away, SS. The more you prove my point, the more stupid someone has to be to believe any of your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) claims. Right now you're down to brain dead vegetables.
No it does not. Provide the page number and paragraph where it makes that claim or admit you're once again lying. Go ahead. You've made the claim. Back it up with the specifics. I've read the 9/11 commission report. You obviously have not. Show where the 9/11 commission report says not all the hijackers were in Al Qaeda. And you like to talk about honesty. How does your views on honesty reconcile with your current actions?
I would also cite the (Pulitzer Prize winning) book, "The Looming Tower". If one were truly interested in research, that is.
