Steven Dutch, worlds leading Physicist debunks twoofer

[SFC Ollie]

Oh yes, btw, it's been proven in court........

Now go away troll......

 

[Montrovant]

So you consider courts the only arbiter of truth?

If someone tells you they see an event, do you ask them if they have certified, sealed, sworn evidence from a court?

What makes a court able to determine the truth of, say, video evidence? Wouldn't it be better to take it before someone who works in that field?

Also, again, you are setting a bar that cannot be reached. Convenient for you. Since the vast majority of people find the evidence overwhelming that planes did, in fact, hit the towers, there is little-to-no possibility that a court will ever hear a case about the possibility it was all a hoax. Because of that, you can continue to chirp about needing 'bonafide' evidence because such evidence, by the arbitrary standards you desire, will never exist to be presented to you.

I am pretty certain that any court hearing a case about the 9/11 attacks would accept the video and witness evidence that it did, in fact, happen.

At least most of the truthers accept the reality that planes hit the towers; they just don't think the planes caused the collapses.

So you consider courts the only arbiter of truth?

Nope they are crooked and corrupt as hell, I consider the procedure however telling.

If someone tells you they see an event, do you ask them if they have certified, sealed, sworn evidence from a court?

Do you realize how hilarious what you just said is? It shows you know absolutely nothing about the process.

However since I understand what you are driving at, its a requirement to get at the truth and punish those who lie, like dawes sock did the other day.

The paper trail is reasonable evidence of legitimate process, HOWEVER, not above scrutiny as I have said regarding the kennedy assassination, they asked all the wrong questions. Ask the wrong questions you get the worthless answers that take you no where.

What makes a court able to determine the truth of, say, video evidence?

process validation

Wouldn't it be better to take it before someone who works in that field?

Yeh but you dont believe them now do you. Even when NIST admitted freefall troughers still would not accept it and they are the agency responsible for the reports.

Its you who is the problem not the information.

You need a certain baseline level of knowledge to understand who or what is right or wrong and how to come to the correct and meaningful conclusions.

Also, again, you are setting a bar that cannot be reached.

Well thats the way it goes, if you cant prove your case in court you lose, sorry.

Convenient for you. Since the vast majority of people find the evidence overwhelming that planes did, in fact, hit the towers, there is little-to-no possibility that a court will ever hear a case about the possibility it was all a hoax. Because of that, you can continue to chirp about needing 'bonafide' evidence because such evidence, by the arbitrary standards you desire, will never exist to be presented to you.

Again thats the way it goes, if you cant prove your case in court you lose, sorry. They had in fact they have a duty and obligation to preserve evidence if they did not then you should write your congressman and file a complaint because you now look like a fool.

I am pretty certain that any court hearing a case about the 9/11 attacks would accept the video and witness evidence that it did, in fact, happen.

No they would not, it would all get thrown out.

At least most of the truthers accept the reality that planes hit the towers; they just don't think the planes caused the collapses.

I do not make assumptions like you do, if that is the way you want to fly and accept any bulshit that comes down the horn well then you can run around with shit on your face because the government never tells you the truth as many are finding out the hard when they are asked to "prove it" and discover all the government gave them is empty words. Look at the fraud in the other thread when NIST claimed wtc7 fell 40% slower than freefall and deceptively they were referring to their model which could not be made to freefall instead of the real building. That is blatant fraud and a crime.

No proof exists because it was all a fraud.

But good luck arguing the governments position anyway because I will be hapy to slp you down every time you think you have some traction. There is simply that much fraud involved here.

The only thing that is true is that a lot of people died in those buildings. Everything else is bullshit.

How do you even know a lot of people died in the buildings?

In fact, have you been to the site? If not, how do you know the buildings aren't still there?

You aren't interested in examining evidence. You just want to continue to set and move the bar so that, no matter the evidence presented, you can dismiss it as 'faked'. You don't prove anything was faked, but you spout off about it anyway while screaming for proof from others, even after they provide various forms of evidence. You harp about needing evidence to go through courts, as though the live video of the planes, the families of those who died in the planes, the many witnesses to the planes, the video of people witnessing the planes, etc. are all invalid.

I can only assume you go through life in a constant state of confusion, unable to determine if anything around you is real, since most of it hasn't gone through the US court system. Hell, I'm not sure how you determine that the courts exist, either!

What changeable, impossible standards will you use next?

 

[KokomoJojo]

Only evidence properly submitted that can pass challenge. Depending on the case a court can accept government provided data without full review. Unless challenged. In which case requires strict conformamce as ollie said, certified, sealed, sworn, and duly recorded by the curt as such. I challenge ALL 911 so called evidence.

anything less is just your average everyday belches beer farts.

So you consider courts the only arbiter of truth?

If someone tells you they see an event, do you ask them if they have certified, sealed, sworn evidence from a court?

What makes a court able to determine the truth of, say, video evidence? Wouldn't it be better to take it before someone who works in that field?

Also, again, you are setting a bar that cannot be reached. Convenient for you. Since the vast majority of people find the evidence overwhelming that planes did, in fact, hit the towers, there is little-to-no possibility that a court will ever hear a case about the possibility it was all a hoax. Because of that, you can continue to chirp about needing 'bonafide' evidence because such evidence, by the arbitrary standards you desire, will never exist to be presented to you.

I am pretty certain that any court hearing a case about the 9/11 attacks would accept the video and witness evidence that it did, in fact, happen.

At least most of the truthers accept the reality that planes hit the towers; they just don't think the planes caused the collapses.

Really, he said he wanted court evidence, it was provided and he questioned the court. Fuck this troll.......Where's 911shitforbrains at least he is entertaining at times......

the court will accept used asswipe as evidence for the quality of a diamond if the defense does not challenge the evidence, mosoui is a fucking idiot he knew nothing about court procedure or that it could all be thrown out. If that evidence that you claim is valid really is then it has a nice paper trail connected with it.

Otherwise you still have nothing and fail to make your case. It looks like the picture of one I see that came from a mountain side in spain.

See getting to the truth isnt as cut and dry and easy as you think. YOu want to prove soemthing is true its not as simple as taking ollies word for it.

 

[KokomoJojo]

So you consider courts the only arbiter of truth?

If someone tells you they see an event, do you ask them if they have certified, sealed, sworn evidence from a court?

What makes a court able to determine the truth of, say, video evidence? Wouldn't it be better to take it before someone who works in that field?

Also, again, you are setting a bar that cannot be reached. Convenient for you. Since the vast majority of people find the evidence overwhelming that planes did, in fact, hit the towers, there is little-to-no possibility that a court will ever hear a case about the possibility it was all a hoax. Because of that, you can continue to chirp about needing 'bonafide' evidence because such evidence, by the arbitrary standards you desire, will never exist to be presented to you.

I am pretty certain that any court hearing a case about the 9/11 attacks would accept the video and witness evidence that it did, in fact, happen.

At least most of the truthers accept the reality that planes hit the towers; they just don't think the planes caused the collapses.

So you consider courts the only arbiter of truth?

Nope they are crooked and corrupt as hell, I consider the procedure however telling.

If someone tells you they see an event, do you ask them if they have certified, sealed, sworn evidence from a court?

Do you realize how hilarious what you just said is? It shows you know absolutely nothing about the process.

However since I understand what you are driving at, its a requirement to get at the truth and punish those who lie, like dawes sock did the other day.

The paper trail is reasonable evidence of legitimate process, HOWEVER, not above scrutiny as I have said regarding the kennedy assassination, they asked all the wrong questions. Ask the wrong questions you get the worthless answers that take you no where.

What makes a court able to determine the truth of, say, video evidence?

process validation

Wouldn't it be better to take it before someone who works in that field?

Yeh but you dont believe them now do you. Even when NIST admitted freefall troughers still would not accept it and they are the agency responsible for the reports.

Its you who is the problem not the information. It does but they were incapable of figgering it out.

You need a certain baseline level of knowledge to understand who or what is right or wrong and how to come to the correct and meaningful conclusions.

Also, again, you are setting a bar that cannot be reached.

Well thats the way it goes, if you cant prove your case in court you lose, sorry.

Convenient for you. Since the vast majority of people find the evidence overwhelming that planes did, in fact, hit the towers, there is little-to-no possibility that a court will ever hear a case about the possibility it was all a hoax. Because of that, you can continue to chirp about needing 'bonafide' evidence because such evidence, by the arbitrary standards you desire, will never exist to be presented to you.

Again thats the way it goes, if you cant prove your case in court you lose, sorry. They had in fact they have a duty and obligation to preserve evidence if they did not then you should write your congressman and file a complaint because you now look like a fool.

I am pretty certain that any court hearing a case about the 9/11 attacks would accept the video and witness evidence that it did, in fact, happen.

No they would not, it would all get thrown out.

At least most of the truthers accept the reality that planes hit the towers; they just don't think the planes caused the collapses.

I do not make assumptions like you do, if that is the way you want to fly and accept any bulshit that comes down the horn well then you can run around with shit on your face because the government never tells you the truth as many are finding out the hard when they are asked to "prove it" and discover all the government gave them is empty words. Look at the fraud in the other thread when NIST claimed wtc7 fell 40% slower than freefall and deceptively they were referring to their model which could not be made to freefall instead of the real building. That is blatant fraud and a crime.

No proof exists because it was all a fraud.

But good luck arguing the governments position anyway because I will be hapy to slp you down every time you think you have some traction. There is simply that much fraud involved here.

The only thing that is true is that a lot of people died in those buildings. Everything else is bullshit.

How do you even know a lot of people died in the buildings?

In fact, have you been to the site? If not, how do you know the buildings aren't still there?

You aren't interested in examining evidence. You just want to continue to set and move the bar so that, no matter the evidence presented, you can dismiss it as 'faked'. You don't prove anything was faked, but you spout off about it anyway while screaming for proof from others, even after they provide various forms of evidence. You harp about needing evidence to go through courts, as though the live video of the planes, the families of those who died in the planes, the many witnesses to the planes, the video of people witnessing the planes, etc. are all invalid.

I can only assume you go through life in a constant state of confusion, unable to determine if anything around you is real, since most of it hasn't gone through the US court system. Hell, I'm not sure how you determine that the courts exist, either!

What changeable, impossible standards will you use next?

You aren't interested in examining evidence.

NOT TRUE, I have been demanding evidence and the trolls call me names for it even though that is the proper way to do it.

You just want to continue to set and move the bar so that, no matter the evidence presented, you can dismiss it as 'faked'.

Not at all, there are SOP's for handling evidence, its not some mythical voodoo guessing game shit like these troughers try to push. It was all fraud and they dont have the evidence and they know it.

You don't prove anything was faked,

No one here speaks the language and believe I do test you all to see who is spouting shit and who can walk the talk. I cant prove video fraud to someone who is clueless about video so why bother trying, its a waste of time. Bring someone on here who knows their shit, but that would spoil your fun because I would have this wrapped up in 5 posts.

Look at that tiny little fizix problem I put up, hi schol kids looked at it in an in a few minutes came up with the right answer.

Trougher tards looked at it and said it did not have the right information.

Conclusion? Trougher tards are dumber than a fucking box of rock and there is hope for the future because the children are obviously far more intelligent than the children in adult bodies posting here.


but you spout off about it anyway while screaming for proof from others, even after they provide various forms of evidence.

Again that is the way the process works, the government put out a report is has to be accepted and there is a stack of academic fraud complaints and law suits a mile high regarding 911. Most that ask the wrong questions but are using the courts to get the evidence documented for future generations and so they dont get shot.

You harp about needing evidence to go through courts, as though the live video of the planes, the families of those who died in the planes, the many witnesses to the planes, the video of people witnessing the planes, etc. are all invalid.

They are unless properly compiled. sorry but thats the first red flag for fraud.

 

[SFC Ollie]

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

Once again, case closed.

Now please ignore this troll..............

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What is funny is him demanding a certain level of proof for evidence when all he uses is truther sites.

 

[SFC Ollie]

What is funny is him demanding a certain level of proof for evidence when all he uses is truther sites.

He's a troll, he doesn't believe 90% of the shit he posts....Anyone that crazy would be institutionalized......

 

[SteadyMercury]

I can only assume you go through life in a constant state of confusion, unable to determine if anything around you is real, since most of it hasn't gone through the US court system. Hell, I'm not sure how you determine that the courts exist, either!

Lol good stuff.

Like I said, seeing the utterly insane rantings of this guy really makes one appreciate their health. He's doomed to a sad existence of mental health issues, paranoia, and never getting anywhere in life because of it.

 

[Montrovant]

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

Once again, case closed.

Now please ignore this troll..............

But the fun!

 

[KokomoJojo]

What is funny is him demanding a certain level of proof for evidence when all he uses is truther sites.

same level of proof I would demand if you were moosy and I were defending you in court yep.

 

[KokomoJojo]

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

Once again, case closed.

Now please ignore this troll..............

I am sure you want it to be case closed for fear I will turn something up and I know I will because its all fraud and no one signs their name to this shit knowing that if someone like me comes along they wind up in jail for perjury.

They will sign it department of xyz to insure you cant pierce the corporate veil and thats immediate file 13.

Nope case not closed, I asked to see the documents. Its looking more like you believe anything without really knowing if its true. If I am going to condemn someone of a crime I at least want to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the materials placed into evidence are in fact bonafide evidence.

You reject that huh?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

Once again, case closed.

Now please ignore this troll..............

I am sure you want it to be case closed for fear I will turn something up and I know I will because its all fraud and no one signs their name to this shit knowing that if someone like me comes along they wind up in jail for perjury.

They will sign it department of xyz to insure you cant pierce the corporate veil and thats immediate file 13.

Nope case not closed, I asked to see the documents. Its looking more like you believe anything without really knowing if its true. If I am going to condemn someone of a crime I at least want to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the materials placed into evidence are in fact bonafide evidence.

You reject that huh?

You have made specific claims. Where is YOUR evidence?

 

[KokomoJojo]

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

Once again, case closed.

Now please ignore this troll..............

I am sure you want it to be case closed for fear I will turn something up and I know I will because its all fraud and no one signs their name to this shit knowing that if someone like me comes along they wind up in jail for perjury.

They will sign it department of xyz to insure you cant pierce the corporate veil and thats immediate file 13.

Nope case not closed, I asked to see the documents. Its looking more like you believe anything without really knowing if its true. If I am going to condemn someone of a crime I at least want to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the materials placed into evidence are in fact bonafide evidence.

You reject that huh?

You have made specific claims. Where is YOUR evidence?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

does that help?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I am sure you want it to be case closed for fear I will turn something up and I know I will because its all fraud and no one signs their name to this shit knowing that if someone like me comes along they wind up in jail for perjury.

They will sign it department of xyz to insure you cant pierce the corporate veil and thats immediate file 13.

Nope case not closed, I asked to see the documents. Its looking more like you believe anything without really knowing if its true. If I am going to condemn someone of a crime I at least want to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the materials placed into evidence are in fact bonafide evidence.

You reject that huh?

You have made specific claims. Where is YOUR evidence?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

does that help?

In other words you can not provide any evidence that ANY claim you have made is in fact true. You refuse to recognize proven facts and evidence and refuse to provide any backing your ignorant claims. At least the other troofers try to substantiate their delusional claims.

 

[KokomoJojo]

You have made specific claims. Where is YOUR evidence?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

Yes I demand to see the evidence, and all associated documentation, how many times do you need that repeated?

I am the evidence examiner not the evidence provider, is everything in your life ass backwards?

does that help?

In other words you can not provide any evidence that ANY claim you have made is in fact true. You refuse to recognize proven facts and evidence and refuse to provide any backing your ignorant claims. At least the other troofers try to substantiate their delusional claims.

In other words your evidence is garbage and you believe anything that corresponds with your preconceived notions.
I claim that you have not provided the associated documentation to validate what you claim is evidence. since you have not posted any you not only prove you are delusional but even better you prove you are fucking stoopid beyond imagination like the rest of your socks.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is a simple concept. You demand proof from us. Yet refuse to provide any of your claims. You have none yet insist certain events transpired. We provide evidence and proof and you claim, again illogically and without merit, that the evidence is faked or not real.

We provided you a list of facts and evidence, you do not get to simply state it is not so. You must provide evidence of your own that our facts, our evidence are in fact not true.

You claim the Government lied about very specific things, about very specific pieces of evidence, about very specific events. It is YOUR responsibility not ours to prove your claim.

We have physical evidence that a plane crashed in Pennsylvania. Plane debris and body parts and DNA. It is your job to PROVE that evidence is not true. It is not our job to prove to you it is.

We have physical evidence that a Plane hit the pentagon and again that includes plane debris and body parts along with DNA. It is your job to prove that evidence was faked or is not true.

We have video and documentation to prove the planes hit the twin towers, to include physical evidence of plane debris. You claim it is not valid, it is your job to prove our evidence is faked or fabricated.

You claim the Towers were brought down by explosives. It is your job to provide evidence to support that claim.

The Government has data, records personnel lists and passenger lists for 4 aircraft. They have data and evidence those 4 planes took off at the time day and location they claim. There is no evidence any of those planes or the people on them ever landed and debarked.

 

[KokomoJojo]

It is a simple concept. You demand proof from us. Yet refuse to provide any of your claims. You have none yet insist certain events transpired. We provide evidence and proof and you claim, again illogically and without merit, that the evidence is faked or not real.

We provided you a list of facts and evidence, you do not get to simply state it is not so. You must provide evidence of your own that our facts, our evidence are in fact not true.

You claim the Government lied about very specific things, about very specific pieces of evidence, about very specific events. It is YOUR responsibility not ours to prove your claim.

We have physical evidence that a plane crashed in Pennsylvania. Plane debris and body parts and DNA. It is your job to PROVE that evidence is not true. It is not our job to prove to you it is.

We have physical evidence that a Plane hit the pentagon and again that includes plane debris and body parts along with DNA. It is your job to prove that evidence was faked or is not true.

We have video and documentation to prove the planes hit the twin towers, to include physical evidence of plane debris. You claim it is not valid, it is your job to prove our evidence is faked or fabricated.

You claim the Towers were brought down by explosives. It is your job to provide evidence to support that claim.

The Government has data, records personnel lists and passenger lists for 4 aircraft. They have data and evidence those 4 planes took off at the time day and location they claim. There is no evidence any of those planes or the people on them ever landed and debarked.

PROVE IT

wrong its not evidence until it is validated by process.

wrong I claim I have seen NO valid evidence from the government.

YOU claim they have valid evidence.

PROVE IT

you refuse to cite the required certifications for validation.

I dont give a shit if you have a mountain of junk and pictures, its all fucking worthless outside of process proving validation.

again you are delusional by pretending it has any legitimate value.

your constant dodging proves you have no bonafide evidence

proving your claim is bullshit is simple, no validation, = worthless PERIOD! No more need be said.

 

[SFC Ollie]

U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Virginia

Once again, case closed.

Now please ignore this troll..............

I am sure you want it to be case closed for fear I will turn something up and I know I will because its all fraud and no one signs their name to this shit knowing that if someone like me comes along they wind up in jail for perjury.

They will sign it department of xyz to insure you cant pierce the corporate veil and thats immediate file 13.

Nope case not closed, I asked to see the documents. Its looking more like you believe anything without really knowing if its true. If I am going to condemn someone of a crime I at least want to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the materials placed into evidence are in fact bonafide evidence.

You reject that huh?

No dumbshit, what I reject is that you want us to believe that you can determine valid evidence better than a federal court can....

I reject that you believe half the stupid shit you've tried to make us think you believe.

And i reject you.

You have been weighed, and measured, and found wanting.......

Try again when you have some facts......You know something that a court would consider evidence.... You've had ample opportunity to see what has already been presented and accepted in a court of law....

So I challenge you, prove any of those pieces of evidence to be false.
Show us one piece of evidence that would hold up in court that 4 planes did not crash on 9-11-01......

When you can do that we'll talk............
Until then, I neg stupidity.....

 

[SteadyMercury]

I am sure you want it to be case closed for fear I will turn something up and I know I will because its all fraud and no one signs their name to this shit knowing that if someone like me comes along they wind up in jail for perjury.

Note: also check the box for greatly exaggerated sense of self-importance and relevance on the form for diagnosing mental illness.

This blathering idiot actually thinks anyone fears or gives a shit about him.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Damn, I have to spread some rep around so I can neg this stupidity again.....BRB