Do you believe the official 911 story?

[LA RAM FAN]

explain the collapse of building 7..

world trade center 7 report puts 9/11 conspiracy theory to rest - popular mechanics

debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories and controlled demolition - world trade center 7, building 7

i suppose explosives with silencers attached may explain it better.

your links are in contradiction to the nist theory

ahh his old DEB WUNKER links. he cant face facts that griffins book DEBUNKING THE 9/11 DEBUNKING,AN ANSWER TO POPULAR MECHANICS AND OTHER DEFENDERS OF THE OFFICAL CONSPIRACY THEORY has been debunked by his book.

 

[candycorn]

The commission had subpoena power and used it.

Sep-11-2009 23:46
The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies

Gordon Duff Salem-News.com

(CINCINNATI, Ohio) - In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies - Salem-News.Com

Typical CTBS and half-truths. Some commissioners had a specific problem with testimony of a NORAD General and Colonel. Additionally some felt top officials and bureaucrats were covering their failures. No Commission member has endorsed any or your silly CTs. None.
If Gordon Duff's opinion is all you have then you have nothing at all, Princess.

And John Farmer wasn't a commission member...
To date, not one major inaccuracy has been quoted from the Commission Report.

 

[eots]

Sep-11-2009 23:46
The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies

Gordon Duff Salem-News.com

(CINCINNATI, Ohio) - In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies - Salem-News.Com

Typical CTBS and half-truths. Some commissioners had a specific problem with testimony of a NORAD General and Colonel. Additionally some felt top officials and bureaucrats were covering their failures. No Commission member has endorsed any or your silly CTs. None.
If Gordon Duff's opinion is all you have then you have nothing at all, Princess.

And John Farmer wasn't a commission member...
To date, not one major inaccuracy has been quoted from the Commission Report.

you just keep telling that lie...lol...you are the same idiot that gives opinions on the NIST report and don't even know what it says..you area clown

 

[eots]

Sep-11-2009 23:46
The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies

Gordon Duff Salem-News.com

(CINCINNATI, Ohio) - In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue...

The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission.

The 9/11 Commission Rejects own Report as Based on Government Lies - Salem-News.Com

Typical CTBS and half-truths. Some commissioners had a specific problem with testimony of a NORAD General and Colonel. Additionally some felt top officials and bureaucrats were covering their failures. No Commission member has endorsed any or your silly CTs. None.
If Gordon Duff's opinion is all you have then you have nothing at all, Princess.

And John Farmer wasn't a commission member...
To date, not one major inaccuracy has been quoted from the Commission Report.

Farmer subsequently acted as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States) chaired by former New Jersey Governor Thomas Kean and former Indiana Congressman Lee H. Hamilton.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Farmer,_Jr.

 

[eots]

9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story
Old-Thinker News | September 11, 2009

By Daniel Taylor

On the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, there remain unanswered questions surrounding the events that transpired that day. These questions demand answers, and far from being a “fringe” movement as cast by the mainstream media, many of the 9/11 commission members themselves doubt the official story.

The following are a few examples:

Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal”, stated in a 2003 PBS interview,


9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story | Old-Thinker News

 

[eots]

9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story
Old-Thinker News | September 11, 2009

By Daniel Taylor

On the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, there remain unanswered questions surrounding the events that transpired that day. These questions demand answers, and far from being a “fringe” movement as cast by the mainstream media, many of the 9/11 commission members themselves doubt the official story.

The following are a few examples:

Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal”, stated in a 2003 PBS interview,


9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story | Old-Thinker News

 

[Mr. Jones]

Anyone who adamantly defends this after all that has been said and done, and all that has been discovered, is really an advocate for dishonesty, and the criminal cover up plain and simple.
When something like the 9-11 attacks happens, and there are vast amounts of uncertainty, lies, and even the people assigned to investigate come out and say it is not at all accurate, and that we should continue to question 9-11, then there is something very very wrong, with it, and something is not right about the people who defend it and act like it's no big deal..
Seriously whose fucking side are you assholes on?
America and her people, or the scumbags who lie and cover up such a crime?

 

[SAYIT]

9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story
Old-Thinker News | September 11, 2009

By Daniel Taylor

On the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, there remain unanswered questions surrounding the events that transpired that day. These questions demand answers, and far from being a “fringe” movement as cast by the mainstream media, many of the 9/11 commission members themselves doubt the official story.

The following are a few examples:

Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal”, stated in a 2003 PBS interview,


9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story | Old-Thinker News

After reading those statements I found only 1 specific complaint and it's the same complaint I have; that the NORAD guys were not forthcoming in their testimony but NORAD'S response to the 9/11 attack has nothing to do with what happened in NY that day and given our natural reluctance to shoot down a passenger jet could even be considered completely immaterial. None of those commisioners expressed any doubts about NIST's findings. None. As usual you got NUTHIN'.

 

[SAYIT]

Anyone who adamantly defends this after all that has been said and done, and all that has been discovered, is really an advocate for dishonesty, and the criminal cover up plain and simple.
When something like the 9-11 attacks happens, and there are vast amounts of uncertainty, lies, and even the people assigned to investigate come out and say it is not at all accurate, and that we should continue to question 9-11, then there is something very very wrong, with it, and something is not right about the people who defend it and act like it's no big deal..
Seriously whose fucking side are you assholes on?
America and her people, or the scumbags who lie and cover up such a crime?

None of those people came out and said the NIST report "is not at all accurate." As always you must lie because the truth just doesn't support your CT lunacy, Princess.

 

[candycorn]

Anyone who adamantly defends this after all that has been said and done, and all that has been discovered, is really an advocate for dishonesty, and the criminal cover up plain and simple.
When something like the 9-11 attacks happens, and there are vast amounts of uncertainty, lies, and even the people assigned to investigate come out and say it is not at all accurate, and that we should continue to question 9-11, then there is something very very wrong, with it, and something is not right about the people who defend it and act like it's no big deal..
Seriously whose fucking side are you assholes on?
America and her people, or the scumbags who lie and cover up such a crime?

You can't quote a major inaccuracy in the 9/11 Commission report. It's bullet proof. I heard the first copies were printed on Kevlar.

 

[eots]

9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story
Old-Thinker News | September 11, 2009

By Daniel Taylor

On the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, there remain unanswered questions surrounding the events that transpired that day. These questions demand answers, and far from being a “fringe” movement as cast by the mainstream media, many of the 9/11 commission members themselves doubt the official story.

The following are a few examples:

Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal”, stated in a 2003 PBS interview,


9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story | Old-Thinker News

After reading those statements I found only 1 specific complaint and it's the same complaint I have; that the NORAD guys were not forthcoming in their testimony but NORAD'S response to the 9/11 attack has nothing to do with what happened in NY that day and given our natural reluctance to shoot down a passenger jet could even be considered completely immaterial. None of those commisioners expressed any doubts about NIST's findings. None. As usual you got NUTHIN'.

the NIST report was not finished for anther 6 years nipple-head

 

[wihosa]

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.

Then government officials who testified under oath before the commission:

George John Tenet - Director of Central Intelligence Agency
Colin Powell - Secretary of State
Donald H. Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense
Condoleezza Rice - National Security Advisor
Richard Armitage - Deputy Secretary of State
Paul Wolfowitz - Deputy Secretary of Defense
Tom Ridge - Secretary of Homeland Security and former Governor of Pennsylvania
John Ashcroft - Attorney General

Past government officials who testified under oath before the commission:

Bill Clinton - former President; testified in private separately from Al Gore. Testimony was recorded and not limited in time.[11]
Al Gore - former Vice President; testified in private separately from Bill Clinton. Testimony was recorded and not limited in time.[11]
Madeleine Albright - former Secretary of State
William Cohen - former Secretary of Defense
Sandy Berger - former National Security Advisor
Richard A. Clarke - former chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council in the George W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations
Janet Reno - former Attorney General
Sibel Edmonds-former FBI translator[12]

9/11 Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name the people who collected evidence who were put under oath.

Those you named were not being questioned by a prosecutor, were they?

 

[wihosa]

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.

Yes, the corner of the building is gone up to the 18th floor. It is what is shown on the picture. You see what you want to see just like every other twoofer here.

The building is gone? The NIST didn't even say that any structural elements were missing. It's the curtain wall. Look up how high rises are built. It's you who is seeing what you want.

 

[eots]

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.

yes, the corner of the building is gone up to the 18th floor. It is what is shown on the picture. You see what you want to see just like every other twoofer here.

the building is gone? The nist didn't even say that any structural elements were missing. It's the curtain wall. Look up how high rises are built. It's you who is seeing what you want.

NIST concluded the faliure of a single column(#79 ) due to fire alone intiated the collapse sequence and that the failure of this single column under any circumstance would of resulted in the initiation of the collapse sequence regardless of any damage

 

[S.J.]

One thing this thread has accomplished, it's shown how wacked out liberals are.

 

[SAYIT]

Any of those assertions examined under oath?

Oh that's right. NO!

Assertions that is all.

Then government officials who testified under oath before the commission:

George John Tenet - Director of Central Intelligence Agency
Colin Powell - Secretary of State
Donald H. Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense
Condoleezza Rice - National Security Advisor
Richard Armitage - Deputy Secretary of State
Paul Wolfowitz - Deputy Secretary of Defense
Tom Ridge - Secretary of Homeland Security and former Governor of Pennsylvania
John Ashcroft - Attorney General

Past government officials who testified under oath before the commission:

Bill Clinton - former President; testified in private separately from Al Gore. Testimony was recorded and not limited in time.[11]
Al Gore - former Vice President; testified in private separately from Bill Clinton. Testimony was recorded and not limited in time.[11]
Madeleine Albright - former Secretary of State
William Cohen - former Secretary of Defense
Sandy Berger - former National Security Advisor
Richard A. Clarke - former chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council in the George W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations
Janet Reno - former Attorney General
Sibel Edmonds-former FBI translator[12]

9/11 Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name the people who collected evidence who were put under oath.

Those you named were not being questioned by a prosecutor, were they?

Why would their testimony be necessary? Their imput was included in the NIST report.
The study included in-house technical expertise, along with assistance from several outside private institutions, including the Structural Engineering Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Society of Fire Protection Engineers, National Fire Protection Association, American Institute of Steel Construction, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc., Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, and the Structural Engineers Association of New York.
The commissioners were empowered to subpoena and question witnesses. A criminal prosecutor would have been inappropriate at those hearings as it wasn't a criminal trial but rather a fact-finding mission. Face it, Wil ... nothing would have satisfied you and your CT Movement. Nothing. Regardless of the findings at least some of you and perhaps all would still be here, 11+ years later, banging on your keyboards like chimpanzees.

"We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true." - Robert Wilensky

Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SAYIT]

One thing this thread has accomplished, it's shown how wacked out liberals are.

The fact is 9/11 CT loons come from every fringe of the political spectrum. All they have in common is their lunacy.

 

[SAYIT]

9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story
Old-Thinker News | September 11, 2009

By Daniel Taylor

On the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, there remain unanswered questions surrounding the events that transpired that day. These questions demand answers, and far from being a “fringe” movement as cast by the mainstream media, many of the 9/11 commission members themselves doubt the official story.

The following are a few examples:

Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal”, stated in a 2003 PBS interview,


9/11 Commission Members Doubt Official Story | Old-Thinker News

After reading those statements I found only 1 specific complaint and it's the same complaint I have; that the NORAD guys were not forthcoming in their testimony but NORAD'S response to the 9/11 attack has nothing to do with what happened in NY that day and given our natural reluctance to shoot down a passenger jet could even be considered completely immaterial. None of those commisioners expressed any doubts about NIST's findings. None. As usual you got NUTHIN'.

the NIST report was not finished for anther 6 years nipple-head

And years after their release none of those Commission members express any doubt about the core findings of the NIST report. So much for your CTBS, Princess.

 

[eots]

One thing this thread has accomplished, it's shown how wacked out liberals are.

Your a liberal ?

 

[editec]

Here's what trouble me about the offical 911 story.

A building that is 1700+ feet high, one that must collapse 100 plus INTACT floors of construction as it falls down?

Cannot possible fall at the same rate as a free falling body dropped from the same height.

Does anyone here disagree?

Because the 911 towers fell in 10 seconds and it order to do that the debris from the upper floors had to smash down intact floor after floor after floor after floor!

And that collapse took exactly the time as a free-falling body would take to cover the same distance?

That seems completely impossible to me.

Clearly the resistance of the still INTACT structure's floors should have slowed down that rate of decent at least somewhat.

It did not?