Nuke Cancer from 9/11 Revealed

a reply to: Salander

Funny conspiracists always want to talk about something that might be contributed to a system error, clerical error, human error while offering no proof otherwise. Airlines never mess up booking, or overbook flights?

In the face of family accounts, DNA tests, recovered remains, recovered personal effects, coroner's reports, and remains released to families.

Even funnier, is never mentioning items like bank and money transfers....

www.historycommons.org...

August 25-September 5, 2001: 9/11 Hijackers Spend Over $30,000 on 9/11 TicketsEdit event
All the 9/11 hijackers book their flights for September 11, 2001, using their apparent real names. The total cost of the tickets is in excess of $30,000:
bullet August 25: Khalid Almihdhar, who was watchlisted two days previously (see August 23, 2001), and Majed Moqed book tickets for American Airlines flight 77 using the AA.com website. They are collected from the American Airlines ticket counter at Baltimore Washington International Airport on September 5. The tickets were not mailed, because the shipping address did not match the credit card address. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 72, 74 pdf file]
bullet August 26: Wail Alshehri buys a ticket for American Airlines flight 11 over the phone with his debit card. His brother Waleed buys a ticket for the same flight at the AA.com website using his debit card. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file; US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 72 pdf file]
bullet August 27: Nawaf Alhazmi, who was watchlisted four days before (see August 23, 2001), buys tickets for himself and his brother Salem for American Airlines flight 77 through Travelocity from a Kinkos computer in Laurel, Maryland, using his debit card (see August 25-27, 2001). [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file; US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 72 pdf file]
bullet August 27: Saeed Alghamdi uses his debit card to purchase tickets for United Airlines flight 93 for himself and Ahmed Alnami from the UA.com website. The tickets are not paid for until September 5, 2001, due to a problem with the debit card. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 72 pdf file]
bullet August 27: Fayez Ahmed Banihammad uses his visa card to purchase tickets for himself and Mohamed Alshehri for United Airlines flight 175 over the telephone. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 72-73 pdf file; US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file]
bullet August 28: Mohamed Atta uses his debit card to buy tickets for American Airlines flight 11 for himself and Abdulaziz Alomari from the AA.com website. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file]
bullet August 28: Waleed Alshehri purchases a ticket for Satam Al Suqami for American Airlines flight 11 in person from the company’s counter at Fort Lauderdale Airport. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 73 pdf file]
bullet August 28: Marwan Alshehhi purchases a ticket for United Airlines flight 175 from the company’s counter at Miami International Airport. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file; US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 73 pdf file]
bullet August 29: Hamza Alghamdi books tickets for himself and Ahmed Alghamdi for United Airlines flight 175 from the UA.com website. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file]
bullet August 29: Ahmed Alhaznawi creates a new e-mail account and Travelocity.com account and uses them to book a ticket for himself on United Airlines flight 93. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file; US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006, PP. 74 pdf file]
bullet August 30: Ziad Jarrah purchases a ticket for himself for United Airlines flight 93 from the UA website. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file]
bullet August 31: Hani Hanjour purchases a ticket for American Airlines flight 77 from ATS Advanced Travel Services in Totowa, New Jersey, paying in cash. [US DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA, ALEXANDRIA DIVISION, 7/31/2006 pdf file]
At least five tickets are one way only. [LOS ANGELES TIMES, 9/18/2001] There are numerous connections between the hijackers booked on the four flights by this point:
bullet Hijackers on different 9/11 flights arrived in the US on the same plane. For example, Salem Alhazmi (Flight 77) arrived with Abdulaziz Alomari (Flight 11), and Fayez Ahmed Banihammad (Flight 175) arrived with Saeed Alghamdi (Flight 93) (see April 23-June 29, 2001);
bullet Two of the pilots, Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi, train and live together, and have a joint bank account (see (Mid-July 2000 - Early January 2001), July 6-December 19, 2000, and June 28-July 7, 2000);
bullet Hijackers from different planes open bank accounts together (see May 1-July 18, 2001 and June 27-August 23, 2001); and
bullet The hijackers obtain identity documents together (see April 12-September 7, 2001 and August 1-2, 2001).
Six hijackers also provide the same phone number and three use the same address. [MIAMI HERALD, 9/22/2001]
Entity Tags: Ahmed Alnami, Fayez Ahmed Banihammad, Hamza Alghamdi, Khalid Almihdhar, Ahmed Alhaznawi, Hani Hanjour, Marwan Alshehhi, Majed Moqed, Ahmed Alghamdi, Wail Alshehri, Mohamed Atta, Ziad Jarrah, Waleed Alshehri, Abdulaziz Alomari, Satam Al Suqami, Nawaf Alhazmi, Salem Alhazmi, Mohand Alshehri, Saeed Alghamdi
Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline, 9/11 Timeline

Can you show the actual passenger lists were amended?

By the way, passenger lists can be amended even after all passengers are seated. As in volunteers giving up seats to flight attendants for example. So what do you mean by amended?

Or is there only confusion around the construction of the list of terrorists. Something that has nothing to do with actual passager lists. Oh my, the truth movement wouldn't exploit and spin reality? Couch, dustification, cough cough, lasers and holograms.....

Title: 9/11 Hijackers Not on Flight Manifests?

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

The claim that no Arab names appeared on the flight manifests for the planes hijacked on the morning of September 11, 2001 arose shortly after the terrorist attacks, and variations on the theme have persisted to this day. The claim initially arose when lists of passengers published by CNN, The Guardian, and the Associated Press contained no names of hijack suspects.

But to draw the conclusion from this that therefore no Arab names were on the manifest was a clear example of misinformation, as these lists were clearly reported as lists of victims, and partial lists at that. Furthermore, none of those lists were sourced to the manifests themselves. The Associated Press, for instance, noted that its lists were compiled not from any of the manifests, but from information obtained from “family members, friends, co-workers and law enforcement.”[1]

Break

Conflicting accounts of the ongoing investigation
On September 13, CNN reported that “The FBI is working on the assumption that there were between 12 and 24 hijackers”.[6] At a press conference the same day, Attorney General John Ashcroft said that “the total number of hijackers, to our best estimate and our best knowledge given the information at this time, on the four planes that crashed was at least 18.” [7]

a reply to: Salander

So your stance is based on nothing but spun sensationalism with no proof in the face of personal accounts, actual documents, DNA and personal items at the crime scene, and remains released for burial? And that is the short list.....

originally posted by: audubon

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: InhaleExhale


I must admit to being a little surprised at how desperate some americans are when it comes to the rules of logic in such a discussion.

Saying the plane was carrying passengers and not being able to prove it is simply a claim. You cannot prove your claim, and neither has the government proved it.

[snip]

The rules of civil discourse say that if someone claims that American 11 had 81 passengers, 9 flight attendants and 2 pilots, that person, government or individual, must be able to prove it. In this case it has not been proved. Exactly which airplane it has not be proved, as nobody has been allowed to inspect and verify exactly which airframe was involved.

Since this isn't one of your positive claims about a conspiracy, I'm going to address it.

What you are unaware of here is the principle of prima facie - that is, that something is accepted as correct at first encounter.

This isn't some kind of legalistic licence for irresponsibility, because it is every bit as logical as more complex logical principles.

One of the big underpinnings of logical thought is that of continuity. That is, things will remain the same unless something happens to change them. We all rely on this a million times every day.

You don't go out for the day, and expect to come back to find that all your furniture has been rearranged, because that would be crazy. On the other hand, if you did come back and find that your furniture had been rearranged, you could confidently deduce that someone else had entered your home while you were absent.

Similarly with the passenger lists for the 9/11 flights. These people boarded aeroplanes at given times, their names appear on manifests of those flights, some of them called relatives during the flights (so the relatives are confident that they spoke to their own flesh and blood), these people all disappeared on the day of the WTC attacks, along with the aircraft they are recorded as having boarded, and some of them were later identified by DNA evidence from the four crime scenes.

Prima facie, these people were killed when their flights were hijacked, and died during the subsequent impacts on the various locations involved on 9/11.

The onus isn't on anyone to prove this (although lots of it has been proved); the onus is on anyone claiming that the above is not true to prove that it is not true. This is not an impossibility, no-one is being asked to prove a negative - they are being asked to disprove a positive.

How you go about that is your own prerogative, and no-one is stopping you. So go ahead.

Awesome and humbled by your response.

a reply to: neutronflux

Pffft. I blush, Sir, I blush.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

So your stance is based on nothing but spun sensationalism with no proof in the face of personal accounts, actual documents, DNA and personal items at the crime scene, and remains released for burial? And that is the short list.....

No sir, YOUR stance is based on nothing but spun and endlessly repeated sensationalism with no proof whatsoever.

Let's put the shoe on the correct foot NF. It is YOU who lives in a permanent state of suspended disbelief. Your faith in the official story is all you have. Faith, as when faith means that you believe in something that you know ain't true.

Senators Dayton, Kean and Hamilton ALL knew the official story was nonsense, and went on the record.

a reply to: Salander

Like to quote me, than form an actual rebuttal with evidence to prove me wrong.

Or you just going to rant to push facts of this thread into the background.

You have never answered what proof you have that jets were never hijacked and no passengers on the flights in the face of banking records, money transfers, personal testimony, personal accounts, ticket purchased, live ones that never came home, physical evidence, recovered personal effects, recovered human remains, DNA testing, first responder accounts, coroner's reports, and what human remains were released to families for burial?

a reply to: neutronflux

Hezis just being an ass fot the sake of it he picked the wrong side and is to proud to change his mind.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Like to quote me, than form an actual rebuttal with evidence to prove me wrong.

Or you just going to rant to push facts of this thread into the background.

You have never answered what proof you have that jets were never hijacked and no passengers on the flights in the face of banking records, money transfers, personal testimony, personal accounts, ticket purchased, live ones that never came home, physical evidence, recovered personal effects, recovered human remains, DNA testing, first responder accounts, coroner's reports, and what human remains were released to families for burial?

You have utterly failed here to prove yourself right, to prove your theory valid.

You offer a story I am quite familiar with, but you don't offer any proof of your story. That is your failure, not mine.

Why should I or anybody else believe your story when you cannot prove it? Why should anybody believe UA93 crashed in PA or AA77 crashed at the pentagon when there is no proof being offered?

And to get back on topic, why did so many of those who worked at Ground Zero end up having the same cancers as those who suffered at Chernobyl and Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

a reply to: Salander

Post the data for the other events listing details of the cancers then do the same gor ground zero.

Prove what you claim for once

originally posted by: Salander
You offer a story I am quite familiar with, but you don't offer any proof of your story. That is your failure, not mine.

Why should I or anybody else believe your story when you cannot prove it? Why should anybody believe UA93 crashed in PA or AA77 crashed at the pentagon when there is no proof being offered?

The thing is, Salander old bean, that when proof is offered you say there's no way of checking it or that it must be forged.

Firstly, I'm not sure how anyone is meant to prove anything to you, since you could use the same logic to claim that the people you are talking to are AI programs and don't really exist.

Secondly, this claim of yours applies equally to the evidence you cite in support of your belief in a conspiracy (other than the official version, I mean), but you never make this argument - which suggests (but does not prove!) that you are being dishonest and unreasonable.

a reply to: Salander

More rantinging. nobody asked you to believe anything. People ask you to quote from the posts that chronicle the overwhelming evidence that jets crashed at the pentagon and shanksville, and produce a facts base rebuttal. You have time to rant? But not time to build rebuttals with facts?

a reply to: Salander

Not denying people got very sick from toxic WTC dust and smoke.


People with what cancer? Can you cite the study that released confidential patient information to even back your claim?

Did the WTC chemically toxic dust sample debacle by the EPA list individuals with their specific diseases?

Where is this verified list of cancers you claim? Can you link to a source that shows the statistics?

a reply to: audubon


What proof has been offered here, regarding the off topic subject of airliners and passenger manifests, or the on topic subject of burning office furniture versus a nuclear event?

None, is the unpleasant answer for those who still inhabit the cruel echo chamber of the Groupthink faith necessary to still believe the official story.

And in the meantime, all the facts we know work against that echo chamber and Groupthink. No planes where there were supposed to be airliners, the wrong planes at WTC, and destruction so complete one cannot rationally believe that burning office furnishings could have caused that which resulted.

Sorry, an independent thinker like myself just cannot take it seriously. Yes, your talking points have been repeated endlessly for 16 years now, but endless repetition of a tale does not make it become true, it does not prove the story.

originally posted by: Salander
Sorry, an independent thinker like myself just cannot take it seriously.

But that's just it, you're not an independent thinker. You're parroting factoids from conspiracy sites that have taken your fancy, without ever checking whether they are physically possible, and with no idea of how any of them might fit together (and some of them are obviously contradictory).

I'll give you one thing, though. Although you're not an independent thinker, your thinking is indeed independent in a way. Independent of reality itself.

a reply to: audubon


Unbeknownst to you, and many years ago, I actually DID defend the official story. I did practice the Groupthink that you still do today. I did try really hard to make the square peg fit into the round hole. Yes, it was frustrating, and I eventually understood why. The story itself is contrived and false. A magnificent deception, planned and executed in classic military fashion, facilitated in large part by Vigilant Guardian.

And on the strange side, I have met, completely by accident, people who were present at WTC, and people who accidentally saw things that confirm the false flag nature of the events.

Please rest assured I do not wish to change your mind or anybody else's mind. The curious and open-minded have already discovered the deception.

My only point is that every claim I see that the official story is true will be countered by the facts that make it false.

Reality itself says that never in the history of modern construction have 3 modern steel buildings collapsed at free fall rates and left 90 days worth of molten iron, from burning office fires, yet this most unscientific event happened 3 times on the same day in the same city block.

Got reality?

originally posted by: Salander
Reality itself says that never in the history of modern construction have 3 modern steel buildings collapsed at free fall rates and left 90 days worth of molten iron, from burning office fires, yet this most unscientific event happened 3 times on the same day in the same city block.

You know what? You're right. Reality does indeed say that never in the history of modern construction have three steel (framed) buildings collapsed at free fall rates and left 90 days worth of molten iron.

WTC7 didn't collapse at a constant free fall rate (it was significantly slower for most of the duration);
absolutely no-one whatsoever is sure how long it took WTC1 and 2 to collapse; and not only that, but there wasn't 90 days' worth of molten iron left over at any of the three collapse sites.

Got reality?

Enough for two, as it happens. Anyway, I'm now getting suckered back into participating in your clowndance, which I said I would not do, so I'm going to switch back to 'lurker' mode until something worthwhile is posted.

The towers were clearly brought down with small, subterranean, preplanted nuclear demolition devices.
No physical power is capable of explaining all the phenomena at 9/11.

The hitting planes were separate phenomena after the subterranean bombs went off.

originally posted by: anti72
The towers were clearly brought down with small, subterranean, preplanted nuclear demolition devices.
No physical power is capable of explaining all the phenomena at 9/11.

The hitting planes were separate phenomena after the subterranean bombs went off.

Then how did the buckling of the towers start at isolated sections about 70 and 80 floors above the ground.

The video in this thread shows the isolated buckling in areas relative to jet impacts.

the-pre-collapse-inward-bowing-of-wtc2.t4760/
www.metabunk.org...

The collapse started on isolated floors and was top down. Not a sudden downward shift seen in all floors or a bottom up shock wave. A detention at the foundation would run the risk of the building going sideways.

Windows at the base of the towers showed no buckling indicative of a shock wave up out of the ground.

There still would have been an EMP pulse that would have disrupted broadcasts and video.

There still would have been obvious radiation and contamination.

a reply to: anti72


The nuclear theory is the only one that explains all the observed phenomena. Willy Rodriguez heard the first detonation, just moments, maybe seconds, before the plane hit.