The Best 11 9/11 Questions to 'throw back' at 'Official Believers....!

Right......

I'm pretty sick and tired of the age old arguments I have with my friends and colleagues we all seem to be going round and round in circles. They cannot seem to grasp simple aspects of that day, even though I've showed some of them the forces required to cut up steel, (I'm part of the demolition industry).

What I really would like is the 11 best questions to fire back at the 'official' story believers.

I don't want arguments or discussions I just would like the superb combined minds here to list what they think are the best 11 points / questions to fire back at the official line.

I know my 11 but I want to see what you guys can come up with.

I'm especially interested to see what some of you guys whom I've respected and read over the last few years come up with, (can't mention names otherwise you might get big heads )

TIA

MR

reply to post by Marlborough Red

---

Question 1: If you took out insurance cover against terrorist attack then three months later your business premises blew up, do you reckon your insurers would pay up?

Just to get you started Marlborough Red

Your real problem is that you started off with a myth. And your friends know it. You should know by now -- after seven full years -- that there is no "official story."

Unfortunately, all 9/11 Truthers fell for this very early canard and shake themselves from that myth for very obvious reasons.

Rational people find it remarkable that you would believe that there is some magical, mysterious "official story" when, in fact, what has informed all of us, including the government, is the actual massive independent evidence form thousands of different sources and people.

The government wasn't the source of that evidence. Neither was it in control of ALL of that evidence. But the 9/11 Truth Movement cannot possibly admit that.

9/11 Truthers cannot admit that because the whole premise for its existence is that the government HAD to have been involved in the 9/11 attacks either sponsoring them or knowingly allowing it to happen. And when people are gullible enough to believe that premise without a stitch of evidence, it's easy to make them believe that everything we know about 9/11 had had to be made up by, and come from, the government.

That way, 9/11 Truthers get to avoid the responsibility of dealing with that evidence directly. And they get to believe they can shift the burden of proof from their shoulders to the government.

So don't fall for that 9/11 Truth Movement deception and bunk. The 9/11 Truth Movement has avoided for seven full years any responsibility to demonstrate its claims that the government is even a suspect.

So don't pester your friends and colleagues with nonsense. They see right through it.

You carry on Marlborough Red! Pester away! What you gonna talk about? X-Factor?

Question2: Have you ever seen or heard documentaries or testimonials involving victims' relatives?

(Actually, maybe you have. I haven't.

Yeah I think Mr Thomas missed my point; I was just after soem pertinent questions to pose to my friends when they bore me with the 'official' line.

MR

Question: Why did Condi Rice LIE when she stated that no one could ever know that planes would be hijacked and flown into buildings?

Who and what is she covering?

1 - Go to the FBI website, Bin Laden File, you won't find any mention of the 911 terrorist attack. Then ask FBI why. Then relax and let it sink in.

2 - The military from Norad intervened only after one hour and a half. It usually takes fifteen minutes or so to intercept any airplane in North America.


I've noticed that the first one, about the FBI (and I usually refer them to the Muckraker Report on the bin Laden FBI file), usually makes a strong impression on people. They become silent. They realise thay've been lied to for more than 7 years. By the media. Constantly. That all media agents are pathetic cowards or liars, and they believed them for decades, on everything. The media forced on them that the Culprit was Osama bin Laden. Actually, they're shocked. I've seen it many times.

The second one, too, makes impression.

I mention that I don't live in US. I live in Québec, in a non-urban area. Everybody around are French-speaking - and so am I.

Every intervention made is a seed of truth, it needs time to grow.

1. Why has Bin Laden never been charge for 911?
2. Why has there never been any time change out parts from any of all the four airplanes crashes provided as proof to belong to said aircrafts?
3. Why didn’t the Government investigate any of the four airplanes that crash that day?
Airplanes crashes are always investigated.
4. Why will the FBI not release the serial numbers to the black box so we can know they belong to said airplanes?
5. Why did NIST lie to the American people saying they did not look in to explosions at the WTC saying there were no eyewitnesses?
6. Why do FEMA and NIST reports contradict each other however, both reports where done by the same writers
7. Why has there never been a video or photo of an airplane hitting the pentagon?
8. Why was G-Bush not whisked away, while Our Country was being attack why was protocol not followed that morning to protect the President?
9. Why was a Federal crime scene at the Pentagon front lawn disturbed with in minutes of the explosions at the Pentagon? Photos of people with garbage bags picking up debris and putting in garbage bags. Talk about disturbing crime scene evidences!
10. Why did BBC announced the WTC 7 had already fell 20 minutes before it fell?
Meaning who told BBC the WTC 7 was going to come down.
11. Why has the media not investigate or ask all these above questions to our Government and demand some answers? Why is the media protecting our Government?


I hope this helps.

The government's dog-n-pony show (aka the 9/11 commission) put pen to paper and created the official story (aka utter fantasy).

How could it? They've been addressed, debunked, and shown to be invalid.

Tell us, why do you insist on always ignoring answers? It truly boggles the mind that after seven years Truthers spew the same old nonsense.

I think you missed the point:

Your quote:

"What I really would like is the 11 best questions to fire back at the 'official' story believers."

There is no "official story" so there can be no "official story" believers.

Larry Silverstein purchased a lease to the WTC in July 2001 on buildings that were attacked only 7 years prior. It was a SMART business move on his part.

In regards to the insurance companies....they fought for years regarding payment.



source

This was the second trial regarding this:


www.cnn.com...

You're confused. The term "official story" was first used on September 12, 2001.

I have one...

How about "we were attacked by a terrorist group"?

Sounds plausable, yet simplistic!

The root of all of this conspiracy theorist / rational thinker disparity is the so called rational thinker apparently buys the govt sponsored story hook line and sinker.

Its similar to believing everything you see on television which unfortunately in conjunction with the statistic of most Americans haven't opened a book in the last year is the root of the ignorance that plagues most Americans.
The PTB of course are very aware of this and know that televised shock and awe will overwhelmingly convince and motivate most Americans of the necessity to go to war...again.

WWIII - WTC
WWII - Pearl Harbor
WWI - The Lusitania
Spanish American War - The USS Maine
etc.

But to add to the list,

The unusually high number of PUT Options, specifically purchased on the stocks of the Airlines involved with 9/11. Options are only good for 3 months or so so they were purchased within a month or two of 9/11. The SEC flagged this due to the unusually high numbers but their records as to whom had purchased the options were conveniently destroyed in the SEC office when Building 7 ....ahem, collapsed.

One of us is most certainly confused.

From brief inspection, it appears that you are attempting to debunk the entire body of 9/11 evidence by casting doubts on some statistically unlikely 9/11 sceneros. Also, the date when someone first used the colloquial expression "official story" is pretty much irrelevant also.

Sorry friend ........ those dogs don't hunt.

[edit on 11/30/2008 by anonymousATS]

---

---

Clearly explained here:

Put Options

I don't think asking questions that have an immediate yes/no/don't know answer are much good. I prefer ones where you actually have to think a few steps to answer... and see the obvious lie.

"If NIST is correct on the assertion that thermal expansion brought down WTC7 and that steel buildings can fall to their footprint due to fires then why have we not revised construction and safety guidelines and warned everyone living or working in such environments that they occupy ultimate death traps?"

He hasn't been arrested.



Since these all have to do with the planes, I will group them together.
I am not sure what time change out parts are. The FBI, NTSB, Airlines, FDR manufacturers were all involved somewhat in the investigations into the crashes.
I don't think the FBI is withholding evidence, I think they don't have it. This was not a typical airline "crash"...it was an attack. Locating serial numbers were not necessary (IMO). Call UA and AA... ask them if they are missing any other planes.



Please source what you are referring to. NIST did state that there were explosions.



NIST's more extensive investigation refutes the pancake collapse theory.


There were MANY writers of the FEMA and NIST reports. Although I didn't compare the names...I will assume you are correct.

That being said, FEMA was not funded or spent the same time as NIST on their investigation.



So, you will disregard all other evidence?



Please explain the protocol for the President. S.S. agents had him in a secured area. Do I agree with it? Not really, but this by no means suggests he was in on it.



The garbage bags were evidence bags.



The BBC, like every other media outlet were told the same thing. WTC was in danger of collapse. Chief Nigro created a collapse zone to protect first responders.



The questions have already been answered