Discussion in '9/11' started by LaDairis, May 24, 2016.
ah, the old "no plane theory".
gotta love it. You guys are adorable.
can anyone answer the question:
what evidence compels you to support the notion that hijacked airliners were used as weapons?
The motive for the attempt to frame Hezbo for the Marines was to manipulate Reagan into going to war with Hezbo. Reagan's investigators ruled out Hezbo as a suspect. Who is still today lying and saying Hezbo did it? That would be you, the Israelis. Why? Same as 911 and JFK, the cause of the re-conquest of the "Promised Land." 911 and Lebanon were both genuine examples of everything Judaism stands for - murdering "allies," lying, and attempting to manipulate war for the 'cause of the Chosen.
JFK wasn't giving arms to Israel, nor was he giving the green light to "expand." On that issue, JFK and LBJ were 180 degrees apart.
And yeah, guess who REALLY started the '67 war....
surprise, you lying little chosen supremacists did...
"Helms was awakened at 3:00 in the morning on 5 June by a call from the CIA Operations Center. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service had picked up reports that Israel had launched its attack. (OCI soon concluded that the Israelis— contrary to their claims—had fired first.) President Johnson was gratified that because of CIA analyses and Helms's tip, he could inform congressional leaders later in the day that he had been expecting Israel's move
Judaism and/or the Muslim religions have nothing to do with 9/11, quit promoting racist ideas and stick to the issues. Bush was a Methodist, does that mean Methodists are responsible for the failure to defend the US on 9/11 or for war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by Bush and his administration? Countries and their people also have nothing to do with 9/11, stick to the actual specific parties involved, wars and false flags are waged by those in high positions in government, not countries, they are not one and the same.
"It is the duty of every patriot to protect his country from its government." - attributed to Thomas Paine
Because they were all built the same way, which was unconventional and new at the time.
The Demo of the South Tower is the most obvious. There, the top starts to tilt before structural failure happens. On the back side, with no weight on it, the steel frame simply falls with the rest of the building. Steel without force on it doesn't just fall. It fell because it was demo-ed. The North Tower demolition was classic, all the inside completely melted and burned out, and just the shell slowing dropping floor by floor in its footprint. The Israeli firm that did the North Tower demo was very good.
The demo of building 7 is just ridiculously obvious. Anyone who disputes that is a complete traitor. Even Jewish Fox News host Geraldo admits 7 was demo-ed.
- - - Updated - - -
what do you think? maybe's he's just faking being a Truther, and is really an anti-Truther trying to make Truthers look like obsessive anti-Semites?
- - - Updated - - -
wow, obsessive hatred of the Jews.
Sure thing Skippy. Guess the design doesn't matter as long as you don't want to believe in physics.
I posted what I think.
Ah a conspiracy theory. He has his personal opinions just like you and I and everyone else, period. Always trying to make 9/11 a group-think issue.
his obsessive attacks on Jews makes me suspect he is a double-agent
And what do your obsessive attacks on "truthers" or "9/11 truth" make you?
my dear friend, I have not debated anything related to 9-11 Truth, in at least 5 years.
and soon I shall once again grow bored of your silly ideas, and ignore you all for another 5 years.
You're not my friend.
Yes I know, you merely attack "9/11 Truth" as in your latest thread "9-11 Truth is dead".
You mean like the "silly idea" that the OCT is nothing more than a massive lie?
So why didn't you just continue to ignore of "us" in the first place?
I can hardly wait. Why do you post in this section of the forum in the first place? If 9/11 is what you've been fed, why do you need to defend it fanatically? It should stand on its own merit and require no defense, no? It sounds like you're not that confident, otherwise you wouldn't be here defending it.
of course we are friends. don't deny it.
Conspiracy theories will always be their own worse enemies. A youtube video stating a theory only has to have its viewer fact check it, and immediately it becomes clear the conspiracy theory is a lie and ergo that person will no longer follow any conspiracy theories.
Semantics, whatever. It is full of junk.
They aren't 'good' rebuttals and they don't get media attention because of their irrational nature.
I rest my case.
...and that's all folks!
i should thank these guys for reminding my why I stopped debating about 9-11 Truth and debating with 9-11 Truthers, years ago. they are motivated by ignorance, paranoida, hatred of their own country, and bigotry. they refuse to accept anything that may counter their pre-conceived notions of truth. they refuse to acknowledge their burden of proof when they make claims.
and on that note, adios. See you guys in 5 years.
BOTH Tony Szamboti & David Chandler are fully credentialed individuals in their chosen fields and have
exercised their right to express themselves in their realm of expertise. What is it about the info that they present
that you disagree with? Can you cite specifics?
Go to Metabunk for a thorough discussion of both.
Chandler doesn't even know the correct collapse time for 7WTC, and Tony, well, none of Tony's theories survive scrutiny from engineers. See ISF and Metabunk.
You're arguing with an anonymous contrarian who constantly calls hundreds of credentialed experts in many relevant disciplines, some of whom have written professional technical papers on the subject, "cranks", "irrational", "illogical" and "moronic". Some of those who don't buy the OCT and have publicly vocalized their views and demand a legitimate investigation are also families of 9/11 victims. Don't expect anything resembling reason but do expect a lot of name calling, it's always his number one argument.
so you mode of choice is to attempt to wholesale discredit them, without addressing anything they have presented.
wow, how heavy is that! The fact is that the much controversial total collapse time of WTC7 is NOT a factor in the
2.25 sec of free fall experienced by the skyscraper. Why should chaotic forces cause such a neat and symmetrical
collapse event? Also, is it OPINION, or FACT that is the info about how NIST lied about the actual structure of the
Column 79 connection to the rest of the structure?
" Don't expect anything resembling reason "
I see, and from the posts on this forum, there appears to be a faction that will not even consider the alternative to the official story no matter what.
oh well ......
Oh, do shut up with your endless whining.
Did you intentionally fail to read where I directed you to sites that have conducted thorough examinations of the theories presented?
Actually it is. If we accept the reality of an 18 second collapse time, then the 2.25 seconds of free fall at the 12.5 second mark is of no consequence.
I hope you realise that the interior collapsed before the curtain wall. The collapse was NOT symmetrical internally. Only the curtain wall collapsed anywhere near symmetrically, and the interior pulled it down thus creating FFA exceeding g.
It is opinion to state they lied. They omitted inconsequential points that did affect the outcome of the collapse. To suggest it was an intentional omission is pure confirmation bias.
- - - Updated - - -
LOLOL...Present something of merit then.
Separate names with a comma.