Do you believe the official 911 story?

[wihosa]

Let's assume that you could find a smoking gun PROVING WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that our government caused 911.

What would you do with it?

The newpapers and MSM wouldn't touch it. They'd spend as much media power as necessary proving that you are nuts.

The government obviously wouldn't do crap about it, either. (except, maybe, kill you).

So even if you could get the news out to the American people, (and even if they believed you 100%) what do you expect them to do about it?

Do you think the armed citizens are going to start a revolution? They haven't so far despite all the revelations about the police state, corrupt economics, open borders and on and on and on. tThe only thing they will go to war over is their precious guns.

Do you expect the military would create a coup d' etat? That's never gonna happen, either.

Are the State governments going to stand up to the Federal government? With what? national guard and state militias are federalized.

Here's my point...your most paranoid fear MIGHT be right.

So what?

Where are you going to find honest men with the power to challenge the system?

Good question. Valid points.

I'm just not toning to go on living the lie.

The perpetrators want those who question to guess at how it was done so they can sit back and pick at every suggested possibility.

I don't have all the facts, only a real investigation can garner the truth.

Lets start there, then we can figure out what to do next.

Some of the nay sayers are probably part of the cover up, doing their best to ridicule any who doubt the official story.

Ultimately they will lose, the truth will come out, this is just to big. Polls now show about 1/3 of the public think that at least some of the official story is a lie.

We're coming out of the post traumatic stupor.

If you can't explain basic physical evidence you have no case whatsoever. You're just her to try to garner the attention that you can't get in real life. Basic truther. Seen it before. It's nothing unusual

I think it is you who is going for an ego boost. To ignore to obvious is either intentional because your here trying to maintain the cover up or your one of the faux tough guys who hang out on this site.

Only a plane could knock down light poles? Because they are 100feet apart? Nothing else can knock down poles?

Weak.

 

[SAYIT]

I've never designed any steel framed buildings but I have a basic knowledge of them, enough to know they can't just fall down.

Obviously no buildings just fell down on 9/11 and just claiming that to be the case exposes you as a dishonest player, just like the rest of the loony CTs.

And from your question I can see you can't quite follow a thought. I said I demolished an Un-permitted guest house that was 60years old. The point about it being un- permitted was that it was a sub standard structure and even as such it didn't just fall down, it took a crew of four and a skid steer tractor most of a day to take it down.
Buildings don't just fall down, especially steel frame high rises, the most engineered buildings in history.

There is no comparison between your guest house demo and the collapse of any building on 9/11. Clearly you have inflated delusions of self-importance.

Clearly you can not refute what I have said so you resort to ridicule. The comparison between the to vastly different buildings is the point that buildings are designed to stay up, not fall down. High rise buildings are the most engineered buildings in history, without a factual accounting of how building seven failed we are left with nothing more than an assertion by NIST.

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

 

[wihosa]

There is no comparison between your guest house demo and the collapse of any building on 9/11. Clearly you have inflated delusions of self-importance.

Clearly you can not refute what I have said so you resort to ridicule. The comparison between the to vastly different buildings is the point that buildings are designed to stay up, not fall down. High rise buildings are the most engineered buildings in history, without a factual accounting of how building seven failed we are left with nothing more than an assertion by NIST.

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Ah yes, ridicule, what a handy weapon for suppression of thought.

Speaking of absurd, "the building collapsed completely in seconds due the failure of one of the hundreds of columns".

 

[wihosa]

There is no comparison between your guest house demo and the collapse of any building on 9/11. Clearly you have inflated delusions of self-importance.

Clearly you can not refute what I have said so you resort to ridicule. The comparison between the to vastly different buildings is the point that buildings are designed to stay up, not fall down. High rise buildings are the most engineered buildings in history, without a factual accounting of how building seven failed we are left with nothing more than an assertion by NIST.

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Not cyber experts, real experts. You can read what they have to say at AE911. What experts can you point to who support your ridiculous assertion that building seven collapsed completely due to the failure of one column as a result of fire?

 

[candycorn]

Good question. Valid points.

I'm just not toning to go on living the lie.

The perpetrators want those who question to guess at how it was done so they can sit back and pick at every suggested possibility.

I don't have all the facts, only a real investigation can garner the truth.

Lets start there, then we can figure out what to do next.

Some of the nay sayers are probably part of the cover up, doing their best to ridicule any who doubt the official story.

Ultimately they will lose, the truth will come out, this is just to big. Polls now show about 1/3 of the public think that at least some of the official story is a lie.

We're coming out of the post traumatic stupor.

If you can't explain basic physical evidence you have no case whatsoever. You're just her to try to garner the attention that you can't get in real life. Basic truther. Seen it before. It's nothing unusual

I think it is you who is going for an ego boost. To ignore to obvious is either intentional because your here trying to maintain the cover up or your one of the faux tough guys who hang out on this site.

Only a plane could knock down light poles? Because they are 100feet apart? Nothing else can knock down poles?

Weak.

Well, what else could knock down light poles 100 feet apart. Oh yeah, thats right, you won't speculate. But you insist that a plane crash didn't take place. After all, the only indications are...

The DNA from the passengers
The flight path of the plane
Eye witnesses who saw the plane
CVR indicating the plane was hijacked
Phone calls from the plane saying the plane was hijacked
Wreckage that matches up perfectly with the aircraft, AA77
And the light poles that line up perfectly with the flight path of a plane that hit the Pentagon.

You have ignored all of the above for some reason. We know why.

 

[candycorn]

Clearly you can not refute what I have said so you resort to ridicule. The comparison between the to vastly different buildings is the point that buildings are designed to stay up, not fall down. High rise buildings are the most engineered buildings in history, without a factual accounting of how building seven failed we are left with nothing more than an assertion by NIST.

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Ah yes, ridicule, what a handy weapon for suppression of thought.

Speaking of absurd, "the building collapsed completely in seconds due the failure of one of the hundreds of columns".

When you're being ridiculous, ridicule is quite appropriate.

Was the building missing 18 floors. Photographic evidence says yes. You say no. So, yes, you're being ridiculous. Sorry.

Were there bodies found at the Pentagon. Photographic evidence says yes. You say no. So yes, you're being ridiculous. Sorry.

Was there a plane crash at the Pentagon? Photographic evidence says yes. Radar tracking says yes. Eye witnesses who were there say yes. You say no. So yes, you're being ridiculous. Sorry.

If you don't like ridicule, perhaps you should not take such ridiculous stances.

Quick...cue the AE911 jibberish again. It's all you've got.

 

[SAYIT]

Let's assume that you could find a smoking gun PROVING WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that our government caused 911.

What would you do with it?

The newpapers and MSM wouldn't touch it. They'd spend as much media power as necessary proving that you are nuts.

The government obviously wouldn't do crap about it, either. (except, maybe, kill you).

So even if you could get the news out to the American people, (and even if they believed you 100%) what do you expect them to do about it?

Do you think the armed citizens are going to start a revolution? They haven't so far despite all the revelations about the police state, corrupt economics, open borders and on and on and on. tThe only thing they will go to war over is their precious guns.

Do you expect the military would create a coup d' etat? That's never gonna happen, either.

Are the State governments going to stand up to the Federal government? With what? national guard and state militias are federalized.

Here's my point...your most paranoid fear MIGHT be right.

So what?

Where are you going to find honest men with the power to challenge the system?

Good question. Valid points.
I'm just not toning to go on living the lie.

Really, dude? Is that how you speak on the job site?

The perpetrators want those who question to guess at how it was done so they can sit back and pick at every suggested possibility.

So all who doubt your version of 9/11 are "perpetrators." Woo.

I don't have all the facts, only a real investigation can garner the truth.
Lets start there, then we can figure out what to do next.
Some of the nay sayers are probably part of the cover up, doing their best to ridicule any who doubt the official story.

Yeah ... I'm certain the co-conspirators now patrol these obscure message boards to ridicule "truthers." Man, your rationality lasted all of 1 post at USMB..

Ultimately they will lose, the truth will come out, this is just to big. Polls now show about 1/3 of the public think that at least some of the official story is a lie.
We're coming out of the post traumatic stupor.

You speak only for yourself, Princess, and you sound more like you're coming out of the closet. Congrats.

 

[SAYIT]

Clearly you can not refute what I have said so you resort to ridicule. The comparison between the to vastly different buildings is the point that buildings are designed to stay up, not fall down. High rise buildings are the most engineered buildings in history, without a factual accounting of how building seven failed we are left with nothing more than an assertion by NIST.

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Ah yes, ridicule, what a handy weapon for suppression of thought.

Speaking of absurd, "the building collapsed completely in seconds due the failure of one of the hundreds of columns".

Link?

 

[SAYIT]

Clearly you can not refute what I have said so you resort to ridicule. The comparison between the to vastly different buildings is the point that buildings are designed to stay up, not fall down. High rise buildings are the most engineered buildings in history, without a factual accounting of how building seven failed we are left with nothing more than an assertion by NIST.

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Not cyber experts, real experts. You can read what they have to say at AE911. What experts can you point to who support your ridiculous assertion that building seven collapsed completely due to the failure of one column as a result of fire?

I notice you often troll for AE911. Are you at least getting a piece of the pie or are you a volunteer?

 

[candycorn]

Let's assume that you could find a smoking gun PROVING WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that our government caused 911.

What would you do with it?

The newpapers and MSM wouldn't touch it. They'd spend as much media power as necessary proving that you are nuts.

The government obviously wouldn't do crap about it, either. (except, maybe, kill you).

So even if you could get the news out to the American people, (and even if they believed you 100%) what do you expect them to do about it?

Do you think the armed citizens are going to start a revolution? They haven't so far despite all the revelations about the police state, corrupt economics, open borders and on and on and on. tThe only thing they will go to war over is their precious guns.

Do you expect the military would create a coup d' etat? That's never gonna happen, either.

Are the State governments going to stand up to the Federal government? With what? national guard and state militias are federalized.

Here's my point...your most paranoid fear MIGHT be right.

So what?

Where are you going to find honest men with the power to challenge the system?

Good question. Valid points.
I'm just not toning to go on living the lie.

Really, dude? Is that how you speak on the job site?

The perpetrators want those who question to guess at how it was done so they can sit back and pick at every suggested possibility.

So all who doubt your version of 9/11 are "perpetrators." Woo.

I don't have all the facts, only a real investigation can garner the truth.
Lets start there, then we can figure out what to do next.
Some of the nay sayers are probably part of the cover up, doing their best to ridicule any who doubt the official story.

Yeah ... I'm certain the co-conspirators now patrol these obscure message boards to ridicule "truthers." Man, your rationality lasted all of 1 post at USMB..

Ultimately they will lose, the truth will come out, this is just to big. Polls now show about 1/3 of the public think that at least some of the official story is a lie.
We're coming out of the post traumatic stupor.

You speak only for yourself, Princess, and you sound more like you're coming out of the closet. Congrats.

It's comical how important they think they are. Yeah...we're paid to come here and poke holes in a theory that barely resists the prevailing winds due to having so many holes in it already.

And, no, the reason I always request conspiracy theorist provide a narrative is to box them into their story. Rimjob has subscribed to about 3 dozen different interpretations of the JFK assassination and about 50 different versions of 9/11. If you write down what you think happened, then you can't go back later on and say, "Well the video I posted isn't 100% what I think and yada yada yada...." No, you Say A, B, and C, you have to account for A, B, and C.

 

[candycorn]

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Not cyber experts, real experts. You can read what they have to say at AE911. What experts can you point to who support your ridiculous assertion that building seven collapsed completely due to the failure of one column as a result of fire?

I notice you troll for AE911. Are you at least getting a piece of the pie or are you a volunteer?

Has to be a volunteer. He's not very good. They should sue him for bringing shame to their site.

 

[SAYIT]

Good question. Valid points.
I'm just not toning to go on living the lie.

Really, dude? Is that how you speak on the job site?

The perpetrators want those who question to guess at how it was done so they can sit back and pick at every suggested possibility.

So all who doubt your version of 9/11 are "perpetrators." Woo.

I don't have all the facts, only a real investigation can garner the truth.
Lets start there, then we can figure out what to do next.
Some of the nay sayers are probably part of the cover up, doing their best to ridicule any who doubt the official story.

Yeah ... I'm certain the co-conspirators now patrol these obscure message boards to ridicule "truthers." Man, your rationality lasted all of 1 post at USMB..

Ultimately they will lose, the truth will come out, this is just to big. Polls now show about 1/3 of the public think that at least some of the official story is a lie.
We're coming out of the post traumatic stupor.

You speak only for yourself, Princess, and you sound more like you're coming out of the closet. Congrats.

It's comical how important they think they are. Yeah...we're paid to come here and poke holes in a theory that barely resists the prevailing winds due to having so many holes in it already.

And, no, the reason I always request conspiracy theorist provide a narrative is to box them into their story. Rimjob has subscribed to about 3 dozen different interpretations of the JFK assassination and about 50 different versions of 9/11. If you write down what you think happened, then you can't go back later on and say, "Well the video I posted isn't 100% what I think and yada yada yada...." No, you Say A, B, and C, you have to account for A, B, and C.

Funny you would mention that.
Both (ID)eots and Jones have been doing a lot of backtracking lately, abandoning their hardcore CTs in favor of a softer, really-don't-know-what-happened-on-9/11 approach.
What's up with that? A moment of lucidity?

 

[SAYIT]

Not cyber experts, real experts. You can read what they have to say at AE911. What experts can you point to who support your ridiculous assertion that building seven collapsed completely due to the failure of one column as a result of fire?

I notice you troll for AE911. Are you at least getting a piece of the pie or are you a volunteer?

Has to be a volunteer. He's not very good. They should sue him for bringing shame to their site.

I can't believe he's allowed to use power tools.

 

[candycorn]

I notice you troll for AE911. Are you at least getting a piece of the pie or are you a volunteer?

Has to be a volunteer. He's not very good. They should sue him for bringing shame to their site.

I can't believe he's allowed to use power tools.

Yeah, obviously he's pitching batting practice at this point. The "I don't know what happened" story is fine if that is all you say. But you can't line up on the side of being a skeptic then when asked to explain the skepticism, fall back on the "I don't know what happened" dodge to avoid explaining your skepticism.

Because if you explain it, and it gets taken apart, you can't be a skeptic any longer. This is why these people refuse to take a stand and write down their explanation. It's too risky.

That must suck to not be able to unleash your thoughts

 

[SAYIT]

Has to be a volunteer. He's not very good. They should sue him for bringing shame to their site.

I can't believe he's allowed to use power tools.

Yeah, obviously he's pitching batting practice at this point. The "I don't know what happened" story is fine if that is all you say. But you can't line up on the side of being a skeptic then when asked to explain the skepticism, fall back on the "I don't know what happened" dodge to avoid explaining your skepticism.

Because if you explain it, and it gets taken apart, you can't be a skeptic any longer. This is why these people refuse to take a stand and write down their explanation. It's too risky.
That must suck to not be able to unleash your thoughts

It seems some of these CTs, having spent so much time and effort scouring the fetid bowels of the Internet for "proof" of their CTs, just can't face letting go no matter how shrill and silly they appear.

 

[whitehall]

Maybe we weren't around when JFK was assassinated by Lee Oswald so we can't address the "grassy knoll theories" but WE SAW THE FREAKING PLANES HIT THE TOWERS. Nobody in their right mind would consider that Bubba Bill Clinton and George Bush conspired to destroy the World Trade Center.

 

[wihosa]

If you can't explain basic physical evidence you have no case whatsoever. You're just her to try to garner the attention that you can't get in real life. Basic truther. Seen it before. It's nothing unusual

I think it is you who is going for an ego boost. To ignore to obvious is either intentional because your here trying to maintain the cover up or your one of the faux tough guys who hang out on this site.

Only a plane could knock down light poles? Because they are 100feet apart? Nothing else can knock down poles?

Weak.

Well, what else could knock down light poles 100 feet apart. Oh yeah, thats right, you won't speculate. But you insist that a plane crash didn't take place. After all, the only indications are...

The DNA from the passengers
The flight path of the plane
Eye witnesses who saw the plane
CVR indicating the plane was hijacked
Phone calls from the plane saying the plane was hijacked
Wreckage that matches up perfectly with the aircraft, AA77
And the light poles that line up perfectly with the flight path of a plane that hit the Pentagon.

You have ignored all of the above for some reason. We know why.

Any of those assertions examined under oath?

Oh that's right. NO!

Assertions that is all.

 

[S.J.]

Maybe we weren't around when JFK was assassinated by Lee Oswald so we can't address the "grassy knoll theories" but WE SAW THE FREAKING PLANES HIT THE TOWERS. Nobody in their right mind would consider that Bubba Bill Clinton and George Bush conspired to destroy the World Trade Center.

I was around, and Lee Harvey Oswald did NOT act alone, IMO.

 

[wihosa]

There is no comparison between your guest house demo and the collapse of any building on 9/11. Clearly you have inflated delusions of self-importance.

Clearly you can not refute what I have said so you resort to ridicule. The comparison between the to vastly different buildings is the point that buildings are designed to stay up, not fall down. High rise buildings are the most engineered buildings in history, without a factual accounting of how building seven failed we are left with nothing more than an assertion by NIST.

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Like you?

 

[wihosa]

Not true. Clearly we are left with all manner of CT assertions - from the absurd to the insideous - but no matter how thorough the official investigation that would be the case.
The internet has made spawned no shortage of cyber "experts."

Ah yes, ridicule, what a handy weapon for suppression of thought.

Speaking of absurd, "the building collapsed completely in seconds due the failure of one of the hundreds of columns".

When you're being ridiculous, ridicule is quite appropriate.

Was the building missing 18 floors. Photographic evidence says yes. You say no. So, yes, you're being ridiculous. Sorry.

Were there bodies found at the Pentagon. Photographic evidence says yes. You say no. So yes, you're being ridiculous. Sorry.

Was there a plane crash at the Pentagon? Photographic evidence says yes. Radar tracking says yes. Eye witnesses who were there say yes. You say no. So yes, you're being ridiculous. Sorry.

If you don't like ridicule, perhaps you should not take such ridiculous stances.

Quick...cue the AE911 jibberish again. It's all you've got.

Missing floors? Is that what you think you see?

I see the curtain wall pulled loose. The exterior of a high rise is called the curtain wall because all it does is enclose the building but provides no structural support.