What 9/11 evidence unsealed in court reveals years after the attacks

The evidence points to Islamists, and as I look around the world and see other terrorist events that they have perpetrated, as well as other attacks here in the U.S., such as WTC '93, there is no reason to think otherwise.

Conspiracists, never acknowledge the evidence right in front of them.
That's the bottom line, this fits perfectly into their MO. They drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan with rocks and small arms and are masters at low-tech attacks. We were vulnerable because we didn't expect something so simple, but I do believe that such an attempt today would be met with physical force from the passengers convinced they had nothing to lose.
 
No honey, they are not lying, they were simply fooled by sleight-of-hand, as one encounters with magicians.

They did see aircraft crash into the towers, but the planes they saw were NOT American 11 and United 175.

More, there was no Boeing at the Pentagon, so American 77 was not there. United 93 was NOT in that field in Shanksville, even though you and others believe there was.

When everything the American people believe is false, we will know the success of our misinformation efforts. That's what CIA Casey said in 1981. Food for thought.

:cuckoo:
 
I've got some really nice beachfront property in Nebraska. It's beautiful, and overlooks an island that you can easily boat to.
I need some cash, so make me a reasonable offer.
I have no problem believing the CIA was involved in the operation. Wherever you look in the world, if there is trouble it's either soros, or the CIA.

Oftentimes it's both, working together.
 
I have no problem believing the CIA was involved in the operation. Wherever you look in the world, if there is trouble it's either soros, or the CIA.

Oftentimes it's both, working together.
Don't forget Mossad.

Did you know that a Brooklyn born dual citizen and ordained Rabbi named Dov Zakheim was Comptroller at the Pentagon in the months (or years) leading up to the attacks at WTC? And that on September 10 Rumsfeld was deposed by a House Subcommittee headed by Cynthia McKinney about $2.3 trillion missing funds, and that Rumsfeld replying to the press on the steps of Congress after the deposition noted that "Dr. Zakheim will get to the bottom of this" or words to that effect? And that all the casualties at the Pentagon the next day were congressional auditors looking for those missing funds?
 
Nor do you attempt to even address the gaping holes in your wild theories, just leave the arena thinking you dodged a bullet.
You describe your own tactics sir. You cannot prove one single element of the official narrative, but here we are 20+ years later and you still recite them. Such a good subject you are sir! Dick Cheney would be proud of you.
 
You describe your own tactics sir. You cannot prove one single element of the official narrative, but here we are 20+ years later and you still recite them. Such a good subject you are sir! Dick Cheney would be proud of you.
I don't think you understand just how useless your comments are. I raised some simple questions about how something you insist happened could have been done and you have done absolutely nothing to even address them. That leads to the inevitable conclusion that you have no idea how they could have been done and just want to skate past them.
 
I don't think you understand just how useless your comments are. I raised some simple questions about how something you insist happened could have been done and you have done absolutely nothing to even address them. That leads to the inevitable conclusion that you have no idea how they could have been done and just want to skate past them.
And I have asked you the same thing sir. Please make an effort to prove any element of the official narrative. You cannot, because the official narrative is contradicted by all the facts and evidence. Critical thinkers such as the several I mentioned to you a few posts back have known that for more than 20 years.

If you think your position is correct and true, take a shot at it. Prove any element you wish. I won't hold my breath. You won't either. :welcome:
 
And I have asked you the same thing sir. Please make an effort to prove any element of the official narrative. You cannot, because the official narrative is contradicted by all the facts and evidence. Critical thinkers such as the several I mentioned to you a few posts back have known that for more than 20 years.

If you think your position is correct and true, take a shot at it. Prove any element you wish. I won't hold my breath. You won't either. :welcome:
I asked first. I looked into your sources and found them to be less than convincing. Answer the simple questions I posed to you. I'm not asking you to prove anything, just give a plausible, believable reason how it could be carried out with no one being the wiser.

I'm not even going to address your inanity about nuclear fission going on. That's simply ridiculous.
 
I asked first. I looked into your sources and found them to be less than convincing. Answer the simple questions I posed to you. I'm not asking you to prove anything, just give a plausible, believable reason how it could be carried out with no one being the wiser.

I'm not even going to address your inanity about nuclear fission going on. That's simply ridiculous.
Small-minded and incurious people like you are a dime-a-dozen.
 
Small-minded and incurious people like you are a dime-a-dozen.
And so, sad to say, are conspiracy theorists like you who see some headlines, believe them and don't ask any inconvenient questions. It's all trendy and stuff to believe wild theories because they make the story more exciting, more like a movie. It's so drab to believe we could be so vulnerable to such a low-tech attack.
 
Back
Top Bottom