Honest question about 911

[SAYIT]

so, does anyone actually buy it, that is the excuse that WTC7 fell as it did, because for 8 stories of structure, the resistance was uniformly removed because of "columns buckling and losing their capacity to support" and this was the result of chaotic fires & damage to the south side of the building caused by rubble thrown off by the collapsing towers.
(?) The NIST offers up lame excuses!

To address the fires bit, have you ever been to an amusement park where there is supposed to be a building being consumed by fire, but its all effects, yes, there are flames & heat, but its all controlled and there is no danger of anything actually burning down. The only indication of fire in WTC7 is by way of seeing what is apparent in the flames from broken windows, whatever is really going on inside the building is out of sight and therefore unknown.

Right! The perps knew just how those buildings would react to jet-fuel laden passenger liners plowing into 1WTC between the 93rd and 99th floors and 2WTC between the 77th and 85th floors. What I can't figure is how they knew exactly where those planes would hit or how the demo charges survived hours of uncontrolled fires but then 9/11 "truthers" never really apply their cynicism to any of the non-official theories.

news flash 4 U
there were no airliners hijacked on 9/11/2001

Yeah, OK. You are officially off the chart and into the loon bin.

 

[n0spam4me]

of course, the cornerstone of the whole thing is the hijacked airliners.
so anyone who dares question that bit must be crazy ..... right?

Question EVERYTHING!

 

[Faun]

Does anyone know of a paper, or video, written or produced by structural engineers that support the view of a plane causing a building to collapse and why the collapse looked like a controlled demolition? And why a building not hit by a plane could collapse from a fire?

Your query is based on the false premise that the Twin Towers fell in a manner appearing like a "controlled demolition." They did not. A controlled demolition brings a structure down from the bottom, up; whereas the Twin Towers fell from the top, down.

Try again.

 

[Faun]

so, does anyone actually buy it, that is the excuse that WTC7 fell as it did, because for 8 stories of structure, the resistance was uniformly removed because of "columns buckling and losing their capacity to support" and this was the result of chaotic fires & damage to the south side of the building caused by rubble thrown off by the collapsing towers.
(?) The NIST offers up lame excuses!

To address the fires bit, have you ever been to an amusement park where there is supposed to be a building being consumed by fire, but its all effects, yes, there are flames & heat, but its all controlled and there is no danger of anything actually burning down. The only indication of fire in WTC7 is by way of seeing what is apparent in the flames from broken windows, whatever is really going on inside the building is out of sight and therefore unknown.

Right! The perps knew just how those buildings would react to jet-fuel laden passenger liners plowing into 1WTC between the 93rd and 99th floors and 2WTC between the 77th and 85th floors. What I can't figure is how they knew exactly where those planes would hit or how the demo charges survived hours of uncontrolled fires but then 9/11 "truthers" never really apply their cynicism to any of the non-official theories.

news flash 4 U
there were no airliners hijacked on 9/11/2001

Where's Barbara Olsen?

 

[SAYIT]

To address speculation as to what the hijackers may or may not have known, what info, what high quality espionage did they have to know for certain that the airliner would penetrate & not bounce off the wall(s) of the WTC & Pentagon? Riddle me that ........

"there were no airliners hijacked on 9/11/2001" - n0spam4me

So if, as you claim, no planes were hijacked on 9/11, what did those hijackers fly into the WTC, the Pentagon and that field in PA?

 

[daws101]

nospam nutsack "there were no airliners hijacked on 9/11/2001" - n0spam4me

 

[Skylar]

of course, the cornerstone of the whole thing is the hijacked airliners.
so anyone who dares question that bit must be crazy ..... right?

Question EVERYTHING!

Except your own conspiracies, right? When we question those, you immediately change the topic.

I don't think 'everything' means what you think it means.

 

[n0spam4me]

In terms of accounting for the aircraft, how much of each was recovered & accounted for - FLT11, FLT175, FLT77 & FLT93 ?

 

[Faun]

In terms of accounting for the aircraft, how much of each was recovered & accounted for - FLT11, FLT175, FLT77 & FLT93 ?

Which of course, means nothing. That any of the wreckage was found at all indicates planes crashed.

And you never did answer ... if there were no hijackings, what happened to Barbara Olsen? She hasn't been seen since that day.

 

[n0spam4me]

In terms of accounting for the aircraft, how much of each was recovered & accounted for - FLT11, FLT175, FLT77 & FLT93 ?

Which of course, means nothing. That any of the wreckage was found at all indicates planes crashed.

And you never did answer ... if there were no hijackings, what happened to Barbara Olsen? She hasn't been seen since that day.

The issue as to what happened to any given "passenger" if indeed they ever boarded the flight in question ( or for that matter did said flight exist at all ) is a tangent and not pivotal to the discussion. The real issue here is do you believe that its possible to simply make tons of aircraft wreckage disappear? what happened to it, did a mad wizard wave his wand and make all the aircraft bits go away?

 

[Skylar]

In terms of accounting for the aircraft, how much of each was recovered & accounted for - FLT11, FLT175, FLT77 & FLT93 ?

Which of course, means nothing. That any of the wreckage was found at all indicates planes crashed.

And you never did answer ... if there were no hijackings, what happened to Barbara Olsen? She hasn't been seen since that day.

The issue as to what happened to any given "passenger" if indeed they ever boarded the flight in question ( or for that matter did said flight exist at all ) is a tangent and not pivotal to the discussion. The real issue here is do you believe that its possible to simply make tons of aircraft wreckage disappear? what happened to it, did a mad wizard wave his wand and make all the aircraft bits go away?

Actually, its immediately relevant to the issues at hand. As it stands as yet another piece of powerful evidence that contradicts your narrative, that you ignore and refuse to discuss. Just as you do the mountains of evidence that contradict your claims, and the rather embarrassing lack of evidence to support your allegations.

You ignore anything that contradicts you. You've ignored picture after picture of the debris, even when those pictures met the standards of legal evidence in actual trials. You ignore every eye witness that contradicts you (and they are legion). You ignore the black boxes. You ignore the virtual impossibility of bombs.

And believe your conspiracy, despite the startling lack of evidence to back it up. All matters that are immediately relevant to the discussion and the failure of your process.

The question is....why would we ignore what you must? Why would any rational person?

And you have no answer for that question either.

 

[n0spam4me]

"picture after picture of the debris," ..... wonderful, and is there an accounting for the aircraft, that is an inventory or anything of the sort so as to know exactly how much of "FLT11", "FLT175", FLT77" or "FLT93" was recovered and identified? The fact that the alleged evidence has been entered into any case in court, speaks volumes about how warped & twisted the system has become. Would you personally buy it ... that is the story about hijacked airliners flown into buildings, with so little evidence presented? that is if you had to literally buy it, that is with your own cash, would you?

 

[Skylar]

"picture after picture of the debris," ..... wonderful, and is there an accounting for the aircraft, that is an inventory or anything of the sort so as to know exactly how much of "FLT11", "FLT175", FLT77" or "FLT93" was recovered and identified? The fact that the alleged evidence has been entered into any case in court, speaks volumes about how warped & twisted the system has become. Would you personally buy it ... that is the story about hijacked airliners flown into buildings, with so little evidence presented? that is if you had to literally buy it, that is with your own cash, would you?

Again, you've ignored every single picture of debris, without exception. You ignored pictures of the debris of planes that meet the standard of evidence in court, that have actually be used as evidence in criminal prosecutions. You ignored the black box data from flight 77 and 93, the identification of all of the passengers of flight 77 and 93........each pulled from their respective crash sites.

Why then are you asking for evidence that you are fully commited to ignoring? And why would any rational person ignore what you do?

You.....you do realize that you pretending the pictures of debris from each crash don't exist doesn't mean that *we* can't see them, right?

 

[n0spam4me]

"picture after picture of the debris," ..... wonderful, and is there an accounting for the aircraft, that is an inventory or anything of the sort so as to know exactly how much of "FLT11", "FLT175", FLT77" or "FLT93" was recovered and identified? The fact that the alleged evidence has been entered into any case in court, speaks volumes about how warped & twisted the system has become. Would you personally buy it ... that is the story about hijacked airliners flown into buildings, with so little evidence presented? that is if you had to literally buy it, that is with your own cash, would you?

Again, you've ignored every single picture of debris, without exception. You ignored pictures of the debris of planes that meet the standard of evidence in court, that have actually be used as evidence in criminal prosecutions. You ignored the black box data from flight 77 and 93, the identification of all of the passengers of flight 77 and 93........each pulled from their respective crash sites.

Why then are you asking for evidence that you are fully commited to ignoring? And why would any rational person ignore what you do?

You.....you do realize that you pretending the pictures of debris from each crash don't exist doesn't mean that *we* can't see them, right?

Do you understand the difference between documenting something and shooting a few snapshots? The problem here is that the alleged accounting for the aircraft ( all 4 of them ) simply isn't there, to the question of how much of any given aircraft was recovered & identified, nobody has any answer, because it was never documented.
this is NOT evidence, its an attempt at a snow-job, 9/11/2001 is a SCAM.

 

[Skylar]

"picture after picture of the debris," ..... wonderful, and is there an accounting for the aircraft, that is an inventory or anything of the sort so as to know exactly how much of "FLT11", "FLT175", FLT77" or "FLT93" was recovered and identified? The fact that the alleged evidence has been entered into any case in court, speaks volumes about how warped & twisted the system has become. Would you personally buy it ... that is the story about hijacked airliners flown into buildings, with so little evidence presented? that is if you had to literally buy it, that is with your own cash, would you?

Again, you've ignored every single picture of debris, without exception. You ignored pictures of the debris of planes that meet the standard of evidence in court, that have actually be used as evidence in criminal prosecutions. You ignored the black box data from flight 77 and 93, the identification of all of the passengers of flight 77 and 93........each pulled from their respective crash sites.

Why then are you asking for evidence that you are fully commited to ignoring? And why would any rational person ignore what you do?

You.....you do realize that you pretending the pictures of debris from each crash don't exist doesn't mean that *we* can't see them, right?

Do you understand the difference between documenting something and shooting a few snapshots?

Do you understand that you've ignored every photograph of the debris, even the photos that met the standard of evidence in a criminal proceeding? If its sufficient as evidence for a court proceeding, why then would you ignore it?

Simple: it contradicts you. And you've ignored every piece of evidence that contradicts you.

1) You ignored the ASCE report that affirms the damage to the Pentagon being consistent with an American Airlines jet liner.

2) You've ignored every picture of the debris of the planes, regardless of the source.

3) You've ignored every eye witness that contradicts your account.

4) You've ignored every positive identification of the bodies pulled from the crash sites of both flight 77 and flight 93 as being passengers from those respective flights.

5) You've ignored the black boxes pulled from both crash sites matches each flight respectively.

What you've never been able to explain as why any rational person would ignore what you do. Especially when you have no evidence to back your conspiracy. There is no reason. Which is why you continue to fail.

 

[n0spam4me]

WHY is it that there is such a HUGE contrast between the way that aircraft bits were accounted for say in the case of Pan Am 103
and the airliners allegedly hijacked on 9/11/2001?

 

[Skylar]

WHY is it that there is such a HUGE contrast between the way that aircraft bits were accounted for say in the case of Pan Am 103
and the airliners allegedly hijacked on 9/11/2001?

Why is it you are ignoring every photograph of airplane wreckage at any site, any eye witness account that affirms passenger jets, the ASCE report affirming the damage to the pentagon was consistent with a passenger jet collision and lays out the location of the bodies of the passengers of Flight 77, and the positive identification of the bodies pulled from the Flight 93 and Flight 77 crash sites as being the passengers of the respective flights?

You're certainly big on insinuation. But you haven't given us a rational reason to ignore the *legion* of evidence that contradicts you. You simply ignore it all...

.....for no particular reason.

No thank you.

 

[n0spam4me]

WHY is it that there is such a HUGE contrast between the way that aircraft bits were accounted for say in the case of Pan Am 103
and the airliners allegedly hijacked on 9/11/2001?

Why is it you are ignoring every photograph of airplane wreckage at any site, any eye witness account that affirms passenger jets, the ASCE report affirming the damage to the pentagon was consistent with a passenger jet collision and lays out the location of the bodies of the passengers of Flight 77, and the positive identification of the bodies pulled from the Flight 93 and Flight 77 crash sites as being the passengers of the respective flights?

You're certainly big on insinuation. But you haven't given us a rational reason to ignore the *legion* of evidence that contradicts you. You simply ignore it all...

.....for no particular reason.

No thank you.

YOU apparently depend heavily on experts & authority figures,
Question 4 U .... what is it that YOU think, totally independent of the experts, you see a skyscraper virtually turn to dust before your eyes and not just once, but twice and don't you get just a bit suspicious of this? Have you actually examined the video of "FLT175" crashing into the south tower?

Also think about this if you will, the angry Arabs who planned this whole thing would have serious data about the design & construction of the PENTAGON wall? if you are going to ram an airliner into a wall, don't you want some sort of educated guess as to the penetrability of said wall? likewise with the WTC, how did the angry Arabs know that airliners would be capable of penetrating the wall, what if they simply bounced off? The whole fiasco doesn't ring true.
the phone calls from the planes are a JOKE, its already been proven beyond any doubt that the phone calls could not possibly have happened, so what is a story with an obvious flaw such as this?
AMERICA has been lied to!

 

[Skylar]

YOU apparently depend heavily on experts & authority figures,

More accurately, I just don't accept you citing yourself as amounting to much. As you don't know what you're talking about. And even now, you're desperately trying to change the topic, refusing to answer why you ignore every picture of debris from the planes.

I'm happy with this topic, thank you.

Why is it you are ignoring every photograph of airplane wreckage at any site, any eye witness account that affirms passenger jets, the ASCE report affirming the damage to the pentagon was consistent with a passenger jet collision and lays out the location of the bodies of the passengers of Flight 77, and the positive identification of the bodies pulled from the Flight 93 and Flight 77 crash sites as being the passengers of the respective flights?

And as an aside, why do you refuse to question your conspiracy when you have nothing to support it and there are more than half a dozen conspiracy killing holes bomb theory that even *you* can't resolve? Your 'bomb theory' has imploded so completely that you refuse to even acknowledge these crippling inconsistencies in your claims even exist.

So much for 'question everything'. You just repeat what you were told to believe.

 

[PredFan]

Thank you. I will look these over later. I hope they will clear up the conspiracy theories surrounding this debate. Or I would hope so.

Not a chance! Lol. It should clear them up for you, but the Truthers will never accept anything that doesn't allow them to continue believing in their conspiracy.