Mainstream journalists expose 9/11 hoax

DeadSeraph
reply to post by AussieDingus

 

Funny how the OS ignores the laws of physics in both cases. Magic bullet, magic office fires. I guess if you can swallow one it's not that much of a stretch to swallow the other.

No it just shows some people don't understand that's why they use words like magic!!!!!
What magic bullet ,what magic office fires?

spooky24

Now children lets get back to explaining how Bush and Cheney used voodoo to brainwash the 23 witnesses who testified under oath that they saw an American Airlines plane crash into the Pentagon.

What about the 100's of eye witnesses [mainly respected firemen/women, policemen/women, paramedics etc] that reported hearing, feeling and even seeing the basement level explosions, that didn't even get a mention in the 9/11 Commission. Which if it had of, would of lead to further investigation and then those 100's of eye-witnesses could also testify under oath. But it never got mentioned and never made it to court. But when 100's of eye-witnesses, from respected professions, report something that doesn't even get a mention in the Commission, then you know something is wrong with the official story. The same 9/11 Commission that couldn't even find the time to mention Building 7 coming down. Then when you look at the jobs for the boys positions hadn't out to many of those on the Commission you quickly see why these things were left out and never made it to a court under oath.

I bet you could also find at least 100,000 witnesses to an alleged alien abduction, and would be willing to testify under oath. But does it mean it happened ?

reply to post by AussieDingus

What about the 100's of eye witnesses [mainly respected firemen/women, policemen/women, paramedics etc] that reported hearing, feeling and even seeing the basement level explosions, that didn't even get a mention in the 9/11 Commission

The idea of explosions in the basements has and lobby of WTC has been hugely exaggerated, most say that it was caused by the service elevators crashing to the bottom.

The same 9/11 Commission that couldn't even find the time to mention Building 7 coming down.

That is because the 9/11 report was not a engineering report, it was a report into the terrorist attacks themselves, the planes. The demise of WTC-7 was not a direct, but rather a indirect, result of the terrorist attack. Furthermore the commission report as i have said about was not a engineering report hence why many details pertaining to the collapse to the buildings in to included. I have always thought of the 9/11 commission report as providing a brief overview of how and why the attacks happened and the NIST reports as giving a much more in depth report into how the buildings collapsed then the history books providing a in depth history of what went before the attacks. If you take the 9/11 commission report as your only source of the 9/11 offical story then you are doomed right from the start.

reply to post by AussieDingus

What about the 100's of eye witnesses [mainly respected firemen/women, policemen/women, paramedics etc] that reported hearing, feeling and even seeing the basement level explosions, that didn't even get a mention in the 9/11 Commission.

They are crazy....obviously.



And those 100 000 alien abductees...also crazy.

Also, there were certain members of a 9/11 commission that claimed that the investigation was a sham...a puppet show...those members of the commission...just crazy.

Thousands of pilots and engineers for truth...mad as a Dodo crazy.

Families of victims...crazy by sadness.

There are to this day..."Hijackers" that have come forward explaining that they are alive and well, and have never been to America...those bastards are most certainly crazy.



Home of the brave land of the crazy...

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

The idea of explosions in the basements has and lobby of WTC has been hugely exaggerated, most say that it was caused by the service elevators crashing to the bottom.

Please...don't make me search for the links. There are clear interviews where people claim explosions before the first plane struck. They were clear on that. But, I'm guessing there is a reasonable explanation for that ???

edit:

ATS

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

Please...don't make me search for the links. There are clear interviews where people claim explosions before the first plane struck. They were clear on that. But, I'm guessing there is a reasonable explanation for that ???

People have frustrating habit of assuming that eye whiteness reports and media reports at the time of any major incident are reliable. So sure you will find lots and lots of footage form that day of "OMG I HEARD A BOMB!!!" or "Ok get back there is another bomb" and news anchors saying "loots like a bomb" and so on. Its all rubbish, these were very very confused people who were very scared so they hear a bang and assume that its a bomb because of everything going on around them and the media who are just as confused as everyone else runs with it. Really next time there is a big breaking news event watch how the media reporting is all utter BS.

There was never any physical evidence of bombs found.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


So service elevators crashing to the basement were enough to blow out the front lobby? or were first responders just confused?

DeadSeraph
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

 

So service elevators crashing to the basement were enough to blow out the front lobby? or were first responders just confused?

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


lol youtube to the rescue!

Do youtube videos work in reverse for sceptics?

reply to post by DeadSeraph


The video does a good job of explaining it so why should i not post it,

the other side of the debate often point to youtube videos so why can't I.

There is no physical evidence found that supports any idea that explosives were used in WTC.

OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

The video does a good job of explaining it so why should i not post it,

the other side of the debate often point to youtube videos so why can't I.

There is no physical evidence found that supports any idea that explosives were used in WTC.

I gave you a star for being so absurd.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


That is such an infantile video, in fact, it is in fact a story board with no video content at all. Now, I have heard the fire department radio chatter and it is nothing like what that story board says at all. Try again.

Big tall structures fall over, they don't fall into their own footprints.

P

reply to post by AussieDingus


People that day claimed no plane hit the second tower because they didn't see it, well if you were at the wrong side you wouldn't.

reply to post by pheonix358



They didn't fall in their OWN footprint!!!!

reply to post by pheonix358

Big tall structures fall over, they don't fall into their own footprints.

Well none of the buildings fell into there own footprint.

so whats your point.

What about the 100's of eye witnesses [mainly respected firemen/women, policemen/women, paramedics etc] that reported hearing, feeling and even seeing the basement level explosions, that didn't even get a mention in the 9/11 Commission.

There are no written statements in which persons testified seeing any explosions on the basement level. All that exists are interviews in which words are twisted and descriptions editorialized to suit there own manifestations.

The 4 year study of British researchers Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan included more than 400 interviews of persons in and around ground zero before and after the attacks. Not a single statement has any mention of basement level explosions.

Wait one second:

I promise I will not say anything derogatory about the British people. I would never, and let me reemphasize that statement, never say things like :At least when the Irish drink they have a plan-they sing pub songs, tell disgusting dirty limericks and proceed to the outside to beat the hell out of each other, while the Brits just wallow in their own drunken misery. I would never say anything like that...never.



This photo shows the North Tower Lobby just after flight 11 crashed some 90 story's up. The glass panes have been blown outward into the courtyard where most of the jumpers landed. The body parts of 3 litter the plaza however they were blurred before this was released. It's hard for me to get any bearings from this photo as I have only been to Battery Park and Chinatown and that was a long, long time ago. New yorkers tell me this points in the direction of the Marriott which is to the southeast. Also, escalators from the tubes go to this location and the banks of elevators are out of site to the right. The photographer( who remained unidentified), a smart move by the way, told Swain that the entire area reeked of jet fuel- a sweet smelling kerosene. This is the same area that fireman McCormick testified he saw the elevators " blown open and bodies being roasted by fire"

I have studied this photograph for years and have failed to get any bearing on which way I am looking.

reply to post by spooky24


Your opinion is garbage. Earlier, after parroting bush party history, you spouted this nonsense:

Eyewitness evidence testified, by the people who were there, is just not fair to the truther movement and should not be allowed to deflect their mission of finally getting noticed outside the drunk tank, the soup line or mamas basement.

There are people who were there who have questions, SIR. And no, they are not trying to get noticed outside the drunk tank, soup line, or their mothers basement. You are a JOKE. A disrespectful clown.

reply to post by DeadSeraph

Your opinion is garbage

You are a JOKE

A disrespectful clown.

Why?

Why do so many people do this when they are presented with a view that challenges there own, rather than debating the issues they restort to these silly insults.

What did the member do to deserve that from you, he clearly knows his stuff, and was merely making a point about how truthers manipulate evidence that you have taken out of context.

He has not attacked you personally, not said that you were the one living in moma's basement yet you have turned it into a personal issue with your juvenile insults.

I really wish we could discuss this very emotive topic with out this kind of nonsense, form both sides.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


Give me a break. He deserved it.

Eyewitness evidence testified, by the people who were there, is just not fair to the truther movement and should not be allowed to deflect their mission of finally getting noticed outside the drunk tank, the soup line or mamas basement.

Those are his words. So anyone who questions 9/11 is trying to get noticed outside the drunk tank, soup line, or their mamas basement? And you are prepared to defend such an ignorant statement and accuse me of juvenile insults? You've shown your true colors.

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Look, yes i think that was wrong, I believe it or not have quite a bit of respect for many truthers on this site so I dont support insulting them or anyone for that matter.

I am not going to debate with you silly little things like who said what to who all I want quite frankly is for you to both shut up with stupid insults and debate the topic and not the each other.

You calling someone's opinion a "garbage" and them as a person a "joke, a disrespectful clown" is juvenile (me defending my comments towards you), it contributes nothing to the debate and its just insulting for the sake of insulting.. Stop trying to go for silly week arguments, stop skirting round the holes in the truther argument by insulting anyone who points out where you guys are going wrong.

I dont want to get drawn into a debate full of these pointless arguments.