OK I read this from another thread regarding 9-11:
"You will find that most truthers refuse to observe the evidence. The ABUNDANCE of evidence.

Most Truthers WANT there to be a conspiracy. They hold on to the littlest bit of hope so that they can be right.

You are right. There is ZERO evidence that supports the CD, hologram, flyover... whatever theory you want."

OK...well obviously the abundant threads have been ignored, so let lay it all out on the table right here, right now.

TRUTHERS- Provide eveidence that there is a government conspiracy regarding 9-11. Lets show proof of CD. Lets show proof of government involvement. Whatever the case may be....lay it out and show evidence.

Official Story Supporters- Same applies. Provide evidence that the hijackers took the planes over and flew them into the buildings (Pentagon included). Show us how building 7 was damaged to the point of collapse. Show us how William Rodriguez is a liar, or was mistaken in what he heard that day.

This is our chance to discuss everything that has been spread all over these boards. Lets be honest, kind, and forthcoming with eachother....HAVE AT IT

[edit on 27-1-2008 by Jeff Riff]

Originally posted by Jeff Riff
OK I read this from another thread regarding 9-11:
"You will find that most truthers refuse to observe the evidence. The ABUNDANCE of evidence.

What abundance of evidence?

1. The FBI has not released a photo or video that shows flight 77 hitting the Pentagon.

2. The FBI and FAA will not release the part numbers of the 9/11 planes to match the parts found.

So please show me the abundence of evidnece that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Also there is evidence that the government had lots of warnings from domestic and foreign intell agencies that something was going to happen. How many warnings does it take to at least raise the security level ?



[edit on 27-1-2008 by ULTIMA1]

THE MYTH OF FLIGHT 93 crashing in Shanksville has been BUSTED!!

Originally posted by Jeff Riff
I have another quick question, we have the Truthers or CT's.....is there an abbreviation for Those Who Support the Official Story? I am tired of typing the whole thing....help would be appreciated.

Yes, i have been trying to figure a good 1 out for them.

Maybe like an abreviation. Have to try to come up with a good acronym.

I am thinking that since we are the Truthers, they can be called the believers....

Hey Believers, we are wating for some posts that provide this so called ABUNDACE of evidence supporting the believer story...



[edit on 27-1-2008 by Jeff Riff]

[edit on 27-1-2008 by Jeff Riff]

double post

[edit on 27-1-2008 by Jeff Riff]

I don't consider myself either of those extremes so I'm also just observing to see what could possibly influence me either way. You might like to think that the 'truth' movement is a big thing but trust me - it isn't (on a global scale). I wasn't even aware of it until last year when I first came to this forum.

Where I live, the vast majority has gotten over the whole thing years ago (not forgotten by any means). We suffered casualties along many other countries beside the US and being good allies, actively supported the 'war on terror' and still do albeit with increasing doubts about the methods employed and the evidence used to select the specific targets of such extreme retaliation.

The 'official' story has something in its favour in that it connects more dot points of real evidence from the whole event than conspiracy ideas which tend to pick on minute aspects where details are vague and they thrive in areas where unknowns remain unknown. There are very good signs that the door was left ajar to allow extremists to take action which justified the ongoing response.

The 'truth' movement has a major problem with all the mutually exclusive theories being put forward like planes/no planes/drones/holograms/thermite/fusion bombs/you name it - these are the things that are having a negative impact on whatever credibility such a movement can expect to have.

Could it be that misdirection and disinformation is being used as an effective weapon to destroy the credibility of the 'truth' movement in exactly the same way a minor political party would be suppressed and overcome by the 'majors'?

Not trying to offend anyone but is the group being led astray the one it's claimed to be?

Originally posted by thesneakiod
The proof that planes hit the towers? Multiple witnesses, caught live on TV, is that proof for you?

I personally don't know either way, but the "stout believers" get a hard time just because they accepted the facts that are in front of them.

1. But what planes hit the towers ?

Did the planes impacts casue the collaspe? Did the fires burn long enough or get hot enough to cause the collapse ? Not according to the reports.

2. You mean the "stout believers" just believe what they have been told and have not done any research to find out what really happened ?

Originally posted by thesneakiod
There have been countless people on here ULTIMA1 who have done research in to why they collapsed, scientific research no less. Its not just blind belief. A simple search on here will prove that.

As for you saying what planes? I don't understand what you mean, sorry.

And countless reports state the buildings withstood the planes impacts and the fires did not burn long enough or get hot enonugh to cause the collapse. Many building have had longer lasting fires and structurla damage and have not collapsed.

Well since the FBI and FAA have reused to release part numbers of the 9/11 planes we cannot match the parts found to the planes.

Originally posted by thesneakiod
Prove to me and everyone here that terrorist's didn't board those planes and fly them into the towers. Prove that a plane never hit the pentagon, prove that a plane never crashed in shanksville after the cockpit was bombarded by the passengers.

No. Since the official story says they did, the onus on you to provide the proof that those things DID happen. We can not prove a negative.