9/11 conspiracy theories won't stop

[TK0001]

To make it look like the planes caused collapse.

...and what would be the point of that?

Again, what is the point of carrying out the impossible task of wiring two buildings (biggest buildings in history to ever be brought down with CD, wired up covertly with apparently silent and remotely controlled explosives, under the noses of bomb sniffing dogs) and then flying planes into them?

Why not just detonate the non-sound producing, undetectible, indestructible explosives and watch the towers drop out of the sky, then blame bin laden?

[Q24]

I fail to see how the 911 attacks were in our best interest wihen it cost us thousands of lives and billions of dollars in insurance payments and trillions more that has affected our economy and the American way of life that continues to this very day and to add to that, American service personnel continue to die in a 10-year war in Afghanistan.

We were doing much better before the 911 attacks, and now, we have memorials for thousands of victims and thousands more lives have been affected by the 911 attacks. Check this out.

That is not what I would call an incentive for our best interest.

Your personal opinion on what is of benefit to the U.S. is irrelevant…

Unless you are the President? Vice President? Secretary of Defense?

It is their opinions that count most in driving U.S. policy after all.

So again, have you read the Rebuilding America’s Defenses document?

What portion of this full body of evidence do you assume that I'm uninformed about?

I wasn’t assuming, it is apparent from our past discussions: -

You don’t appear aware of the method and results of the NIST study.

I’m not convinced you have knowledge of the background material to formulate a plausible false flag theory.

You seem to think Screw Loose Change is a rational ‘debunking’ effort.

It’s those points which lead me to question how informed you are. Then I make a statement based on the facts and, without support, you claim I have it “completely backwards”.

Let me pick one point I stated: -

A simple terrorist attack relies on selective use of the full evidence.

If this is backwards, where does the official investigation account for… (there’s any one of a hundred examples I could use here)… the PNAC background? Or intelligence agency connections to Al Qaeda? Or the Israeli tie-ins to 9/11? This is the type of evidence that must be repeatedly waived in order to maintain the illusion of a simple terrorist attack… 9/11 was clearly nothing of the sort if you look at the background and connected events.

[Czero 101]

I have shown you that the statement "there is no evidence of chemical explosions" is false.

And I have shown you a plausible and, imo, more probable explanation for the evidence that you interpret as a "chemical explosion".

your attempt at splitting hairs over unintended and imagined detail is not relevent to proving the above statement false.

Which "unintended and imagined detail" are you referring to?

Again I will ask you, are you willing to consider the possibility that your "flash" could be the result of some other process than a "chemical explosion"...? And if not, why?

Cz

[Q24]

...and what would be the point of that?

To make the ‘Al Qaeda’ terrorists appear responsible.

Again, what is the point of carrying out the impossible task of wiring two buildings (biggest buildings in history to ever be brought down with CD, wired up covertly with apparently silent and remotely controlled explosives, under the noses of bomb sniffing dogs) and then flying planes into them?

To make it look like the planes caused collapse.

Why not just detonate the non-sound producing, undetectible, indestructible explosives and watch the towers drop out of the sky, then blame bin laden?

‘Al Qaeda’ terrorists could not have gained the necessary access.

[TK0001]

‘Al Qaeda’ terrorists could not have gained the necessary access.

So the government, capable of absolutely anything under the sun according to conspiracy theorists, was completely incapable of framing Al Qaeda terrorists with the covert wiring up of these buildings? This is the one thing the government just couldn't accomplish?

C'mon.

[Q24]

So the government, capable of absolutely anything under the sun according to conspiracy theorists, was completely incapable of framing Al Qaeda terrorists with the covert wiring up of these buildings? This is the one thing the government just couldn't accomplish?

C'mon.

‘Al Qaeda’ did not have the network to achieve something as set out in my post #369 here

The steps laid out were unattainable to simple terrorists.

The demolition required contacts, influence, enormous funds, expertise.

As we saw, the crude attempt of 1993 was a failure.

[skyeagle409]

'Al Qaeda' did not have the network to achieve something as set out in my post #369 here

The steps laid out were unattainable to simple terrorists.

The demolition required contacts, influence, enormous funds, expertise.

As we saw, the crude attempt of 1993 was a failure.

It sure was a failure despite more than 1000 pounds of explosives planted and detonated beneath one of the WTC buildings. The uncle of the terrorist who planted the explosives was the same person who planned the 911 attacks against America.

[skyeagle409]

Your personal opinion on what is of benefit to the U.S. is irrelevant…

You can't argue with the facts. Foreign terrorist were responsible for planning and carrying out the 911 attacks, not the U.S. government.

[Q24]

It sure was a failure despite more than 1000 pounds of explosives planted and detonated beneath one of the WTC buildings. The uncle of the terrorist who planted the explosives was the same person who planned the 911 attacks against America.

What about the FBI informant who helped build the bomb, what happened to him?

You can't argue with the facts. Foreign terrorist were responsible for planning and carrying out the 911 attacks, not the U.S. government.

That does not address what I said or answer what I asked.

The fact you are not prepared to have an open and honest debate is telling.

[skyeagle409]

What about the FBI informant who helped build the bomb, what happened to him?

You might what to read what happened to him and others, here.

An Islamic fundamentalist named Mohammad Salameh had rented the vehicle, we learned, and on March 4, an FBI SWAT team arrested him as he tried in vain to get his $400 deposit back.

One clue led to another and we soon had in custody three more suspects—Nidal Ayyad, Mahmoud Abouhalima, and Ahmed Ajaj. We’d also found the apartment where the bomb was built and a storage locker containing dangerous chemicals, including enough cyanide gas to wipe out a town. All four men were tried, convicted, and sentenced to life.

My link

That does not address what I said or answer what I asked.

The fact you are not prepared to have an open and honest debate is telling.

The facts have been laid out for all to see, but it seems that those facts are being deliberately ignored.

[skyeagle409]

To make the 'Al Qaeda' terrorists appear responsible.

To make it look like the planes caused collapse.

That does not make any sense at all. Just blow up the buildings and blame it on the terrorist without going through all of the trouble of training terrorist as pilots and as 'muscle men.'

We already know that foreign terrorist were responsible for the 911 attacks, and we already know that aircraft were responsible for starting the fires that eventually resulted in the collapses of the WTC buildings.

It has become evident that the 911 conspiracist make up things as they go.

Edited October 8, 2011 by skyeagle409

[Q24]

The facts have been laid out for all to see, but it seems that those facts are being deliberately ignored.

This is the third time I’m asking you to address aims and triggers set out in the Rebuilding America’s Defenses document.

The only person ignoring these facts is you.

That does not make any sense at all. Just blow up the buildings and blame it on the terrorist without going through all of the trouble of training terrorist as pilots and as 'muscle men.'

It makes perfect sense - see my posts #304 and #306 above.

We already know that foreign terrorist were responsible for the 911 attacks, and we already know that aircraft were responsible for starting the fires that eventually resulted in the collapses of the WTC buildings.

No, they are huge assumptions you make through selective use of the evidence.

You would have been suckered by Operation Himmler too, wouldn’t you?

[skyeagle409]

This is the third time I'm asking you to address aims and triggers set out in the Rebuilding America's Defenses document.

We rebuild our national defense based on current and the projected world situation, but blowing up our own buildings, including the Pentagon, is not the way we do it in the real world.

It makes perfect sense - see my posts #304 and #306 above.

No it doesen't maek any sense at all. Face the fact that foreign terrorist were responsible for the 911 attacks, which cost us trillions of dollars and the loss of thousands of lives, not the U.S. government.

What it is, 911 conspiracy supporters live in a world of denial and fantasy as noted by the fact that it has been proven beyond any doubt that foreign terrorist were responsible, and the facts have been laid out in the open for all to see.

Edited October 8, 2011 by skyeagle409

[skyeagle409]

No, they are huge assumptions you make through selective use of the evidence.

On the contrary, evidence is evidence, and it has already been proven the foreign terrorist were responsible and it has been proven that there were no explosives involved and to prove my point, there are no explosions evident in the videos when the WTC buildings collapsed and none were planted before, nor after the impacts.

If done prior, the explosives would have been detonated by the aircraft impacts, and there was no time to plant explosives after the impacts, especially when people were trying to find ways to evacuate the buildings and the fact that the buildings were full of smoke and flames at the level of the impacts to plant anything.

To sum that up, to say that someone ran up all the up to the level of the impacts and planted explosives to make it look like the airliners were responsiblle for the collapse is absurd to say the least.

Edited October 8, 2011 by skyeagle409

[Q24]

We rebuild our national defense based on current and the projected world situation, but blowing up our own buildings, including the Pentagon, is not the way we do it in the real world.

Apparently, it is - the end justifies the means.

And I’m not sure what “we” you are talking about... “we rebuild”… “the way we do it”…?

There is no “we”.

There is “you”, there is “me”, there is “them”, there are “others”.

It would be a mistake to judge everyone by your own standards.

What you are actually saying, is this is what “you” would do.

But as I pointed out - “you” were not driving the policy, “you” are not relevant.

No it doesen't maek any sense at all. Face the fact that foreign terrorist were responsible for the 911 attacks, which cost us trillions of dollars and the loss of thousands of lives, not the U.S. government.

All the dollars and lives in the world won’t maintain the United States’ global pre-eminence. You are operating on a completely different level to those behind the 9/11 false flag… your priorities are family, a paycheck, personal comforts and so on… their priorities are the future shape of the globe.

You think “they” wouldn’t swap “you” to secure continued global pre-eminence of the United States?

What it is, 911 conspiracy supporters live in a world of denial and fantasy as noted by the fact that it has been proven beyond any doubt that foreign terrorist were responsible, and the facts have been laid out in the open for all to see.

If by “foreign terrorist” you mean Arabs and bin Laden…

Show us the trial, skyeagle - that’s how guilt is determined in the civilised world, isn’t it?

Last I heard, the Bush administration never put together a legal case and declined the opportunity to put bin Laden on trial. The FBI stated in 2006 they had no evidence of bin Laden’s guilt. The British government did put together a public report but specifically stated it was not intended as a legal case and evidence they claimed to possess of bin Laden’s guilt was supposedly too sensitive to publish.

This standard of “proven beyond doubt” is straight from the Dark Ages, skyeagle.

If done prior, the explosives would have been detonated by the aircraft impacts…

The large majority of core columns were not damaged by the impacts - therefore, why should charges attached to that majority be detonated? The initial fireball quickly burnt off - encase the charges correctly and the relatively low core temperatures would not be an issue.

All “you” are doing is looking for problems… “they” would have looked for solutions.

[skyeagle409]

Apparently, it is - the end justifies the means.

Not in this case it doesn't.

Like the Pentagon handing out awards to a soldier for blowing up the Pentagon and killing his comrades. As I have said before, what you are saying doesn't make any sense at all.

[skyeagle409]

And I'm not sure what "we" you are talking about... "we rebuild"… "the way we do it"…?

We have to rebuild, for we have no choice in the matter now, and the cost will be in the trillions, and the attacks have already resulted in the loss of thousands of innocent lives. That is not good for America by any means.

There is no "we".

There is "you", there is "me", there is "them", there are "others".

There are the terrorist who had no backing from the U.S. government.

Last I heard, the Bush administration never put together a legal case and declined the opportunity to put bin Laden on trial. The FBI stated in 2006 they had no evidence of bin Laden's guilt.

They had the evidence all along. After all, the U.S. government was not hunting down Bin Laden to invite him to a mascaraed party at the White House.

[skyeagle409]

If by "foreign terrorist" you mean Arabs and bin Laden…

That is correct.

Show us the trial, skyeagle - that's how guilt is determined in the civilised world, isn't it?

In regards to foreign terroirst, documentation recovered before, and after the 911 attacks.

[Q24]

Not in this case it doesn't.

Like the Pentagon handing out awards to a soldier for blowing up the Pentagon and killing his comrades. As I have said before, what you are saying doesn't make any sense at all.

I knowww… I have to pack in all that soldiers blowing up Pentagons and getting medals talk.

We have to rebuild, for we have no choice in the matter now, and the cost will be in the trillions, and the attacks have already resulted in the loss of thousands of innocent lives. That is not good for America by any means.

You are right… 0.00001% of the population is more important to world leaders than the global position of the United States itself, obviously.

There are the terrorist who had no backing from the U.S. government.

I get that now… it only happens the terrorist actions provided precisely the pretext individuals in the Bush administration needed right after they came to power… I was underestimating the power of fortune and coincidence.

They had the evidence all along. After all, the U.S. government was not hunting down Bin Laden to invite him to a mascaraed party at the White House.

What evidence? Err, I mean… yes, the evidence was there all along. Because when U.S. sources mistranslate videotapes, when the FBI say they have no evidence, when bin Laden twice denies responsibility for 9/11 and when there is in fact zerooo evidence he was the mastermind… that is, without doubt, evidence he did it.

In regards to foreign terroirst, documentation recovered before, and after the 911 attacks.

There was me thinking the justice system existed for a reason… tsk… how unnecessary…

It’s ok… skyeagle has a document saying bin Laden did it…

BURN THE WITCH!!!

Woo yeah, this feels good.

I could really get into this sort of brainless mindset - it’s awesome not having to think!

BIN LADEN DUNNIT!

LET’S KICK SOME TERRORIST ASS! Enact a bit of long-planned regime change while we are at it [nudge wink]

YEAH BABY WAR!

You’ve set me free, skyeagle.

[skyeagle409]

This is the third time I'm asking you to address aims and triggers set out in the Rebuilding America's Defenses document.

The only person ignoring these facts is you.

It makes perfect sense - see my posts #304 and #306 above.

Seems you were unaware that it has been determined that there were no financiial connection between the Saudi government and the terrorist. That was the finding of the 9/11 Commission Report.

My link

[skyeagle409]

IIt's ok… skyeagle has a document saying bin Laden did it…

BURN THE WITCH!!!

The 'WITCH' has been burned, as of May 1, 2011.Seems you were unaware that Bin Laden admitted his involvement in the 911 terrorist attacks.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has stated that classified evidence linking al-Qaeda and bin Laden to the September 11 attacks is clear and irrefutable

My link

My link

[/quote

"God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the Towers , but after the situation became unbearable—and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon —I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed—when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the U.S. Sixth Fleet .

As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon , it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way: to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women."

Bin Laden, The Guardian (London). October 30, 2004.

Edited October 9, 2011 by skyeagle409

[Q24]

Seems you were unaware that it has been determined that there were no financiial connection between the Saudi government and the terrorist. That was the finding of the 9/11 Commission Report.

My link

That is correct, the Commission did say that basically the Saudi government agents who aided the hijackers inside the United States were very nice men who could not possibly have had anything to do with 9/11. There’s no mention how they actually came to that conclusion, but come to it they did. The Commission also said the source of funding for the attack was of little practical significance. Not sure how they came to that conclusion either. Just what sort of ‘investigation’ was this?

Anyhow, as we know, the Commission report (that half of the Commission staff themselves have trashed) is gospel.

The 'WITCH' has been burned, as of May 1, 2011.

You said it

[skyeagle409]

That is correct, the Commission did say that basically the Saudi government agents who aided the hijackers inside the United States were very nice men who could not possibly have had anything to do with 9/11. There's no mention how they actually came to that conclusion, but come to it they did. The Commission also said the source of funding for the attack was of little practical significance. Not sure how they came to that conclusion either. Just what sort of 'investigation' was this?

Anyhow, as we know, the Commission report (that half of the Commission staff themselves have trashed) is gospel.

You said it

Once again, the Saudi government had no role in the 911 attacks, and Israeli agents were not involved either.

[skyeagle409]

You said it

Were you aware that Bin Laden had finally admitted to his involvement in the 911 attacks?

[MID]

And I’m not sure what “we” you are talking about... “we rebuild”… “the way we do it”…?

There is no “we”.

There is “you”, there is “me”, there is “them”, there are “others”.

Ah! That you cannot understand "we" is revealing.

But not surprising. It explains alot about you.