LCFC - Coming soon to a cinema near you...

Mince said:
BECAUSE YOU ARE GRATUITOUSLY ACCUSING PEOPLE (YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHO) OF 2,700 PLUS COUNTS OF THE WORST CRIME KNOWN TO HUMANKIND!


Yes, I do expect you to fully solve the crime. I can be really demanding that way.



(Damnit, you made me type in all caps. Curse you)
Click to expand...

Calm down hun. We don't need to solve the crime. If an engineer had irrefutable evidence that builing 7 was a CD, would he have to have a suspect before he presented that evidence?
 
jessicarabbit said:
Check the FBI website. When you show me some hard evidence of OBLs involvement I will convert to your church and become a jref gravy groupie.
Click to expand...
Is that your best evidence that someone in the USG was involved? Do you rest your case?
 
Russell Pickering said:
Leading a nation to war under false pretenses that resulted in the deaths of over 3000 soldiers (so far) and thousands of foreign citizens (some innocent) is called.......................
Click to expand...

Stupidity Russell.

Now can you answer my question please what is the connection between 911 being an inside job and the war in Iraq?
 
Russell Pickering said:
Leading a nation to war under false pretenses that resulted in the deaths of over 3000 soldiers (so far) and thousands of foreign citizens (some innocent) is called.......................
Click to expand...


I've presented this at least twice before:


This is why we are in Iraq:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Secu...esolution_1441

http://www.casi.org.uk/info/scriraq.html

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/li.../un/index.html


Quote:
1194 (9 September 1998): Iraq-Kuwait.
"Condemns the decision by Iraq ... to suspend cooperation with [Unscom] and the IAEA", demands that the decisions be reversed and cancels October 1998 scheduled sanctions review.
Quote:
1115 (21 June 1997): Iraq-Kuwait.
"Condemns the repeated refusal of the Iraqi authorities to allow access to sites" and "[d]emands that [they] cooperate fully" with Unscom. Suspends the sanctions and arms embargo reviews (paragraphs 21 and 28 of SCR 687) until the next Unscom report and threatens to "impose additional measures on those categories of Iraqi officials responsible for the non-compliance".

Yes, there were no WMD's. But before March of 2003, who knew?


ETA: And I was referring to the 2,700 plus killed on 9/11, not any casualties of war.
 
Last edited:
jessicarabbit said:
I don't agree with everything killtown says but at least he does research. He doesn't sit on his arse parroting the official story.
Click to expand...
No, he sits on his arse and harasses a victim of 9/11 with his own story. His research? Are you kidding me? I encourage you to read the 75-page thread here about the flight 93 plume, you know, the one Killtown started. His research abilities are fully on display there.

Given any thought to why you lie so often?
 
I don't have to provide a new suspect. You accuse bin laden, so please let me see the hard evidence against him.
Click to expand...
Such as an exact transcript to his confession tape, or a link to the video itself?
 
jessicarabbit said:
I don't have to provide a new suspect. You accuse bin laden, so please let me see the hard evidence against him.
Click to expand...
I agree with what the investigators say. I encourage you to read their reports. The burden of proof is on you to show that they're wrong.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?
 
Russell Pickering said:
Gravy,

Imagine that I am the District Attorney and prove to me explosives were not used.

I have:

1) 40 some firefighter witnesses.

2) Video of squibs similar to CD.

3) 3 steel frame buildings that collapsed straight down all on the same day in the same place for the first time in history. At least one not hit by a plane.

4) Civilian eyewitnesses who reported explosions.

5) A non explanation of WTC 7 from FEMA.

P.S. Don't bring your NIST reports because they are not admissible as evidence in a court. They also failed to test for explosives even if they were.

Russell
Click to expand...
I'm sorry Russell, but you state that as though you'd win the case. So please... take it to court already. I honestly see no reason why you guys aren't doing more to bring this out.

You claim the evidence is on your side.

You claim 83% of the American population at least "have questions".

Go then! WTF are you waiting for? Let's blow this puppy wide open! Would the Doubletree video be integral at this point? You don't trust the NIST reports now, why bother waiting for their building 7 report?

Your troops are ready. You're well armed.

.... and yet? Nothing.

So please. I am asking you when? When will this movement stop dancing around with accusations, put their cards on the table and DO SOMETHING about it? I sincerely want to know.
 
Gravy said:
I agree with what the investigators say. I encourage you to read their reports. The burden of proof is on you to show that they're wrong.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?
Click to expand...

Right heres the deal gravy:

If you show me hard evidence of OBLs involvement, I will immediately cease all CT activities and convert my film to one that supports the official version.
 
Gravy said:
Ah, now I see why jessica is spending so much time here. She's avoiding RWGuinn's challenge here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2056675&postcount=359

jessica, you said you wouldn't discuss the collapse of the towers with someone who doesn't understand the necessary math. You've now failed to meet the challenge of two people who do understand.

Just pathetic.
Click to expand...

Gravy as I pointed out, a quick search of the forum drew a concession that the jrefers had accepted the refutation produced by hoffman. The first paper you cited was submitted on 13 sept 2001. I rest my case.
 
realitybites said:
I'm sorry Russell, but you state that as though you'd win the case. So please... take it to court already. I honestly see no reason why you guys aren't doing more to bring this out.

You claim the evidence is on your side.

You claim 83% of the American population at least "have questions".

Go then! WTF are you waiting for? Let's blow this puppy wide open! Would the Doubletree video be integral at this point? You don't trust the NIST reports now, why bother waiting for their building 7 report?

Your troops are ready. You're well armed.

.... and yet? Nothing.

So please. I am asking you when? When will this movement stop dancing around with accusations, put their cards on the table and DO SOMETHING about it? I sincerely want to know.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see the DA's face when Russell shows up and says "I'm here for you to prove to me that 9/11 wasn't an inside job."

Is any of this sinking in, Russell? Do you understand that since none of the investigators of any element of the 9/11 attacks or its consequences supports your position, the burden of proof is on you?
 
jessicarabbit said:
Calm down hun.
Click to expand...

Please don't presume to know my state of mind and I'll do you the same favor. K? Thx.


We don't need to solve the crime. If an engineer had irrefutable evidence that builing 7 was a CD, would he have to have a suspect before he presented that evidence?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you don't intend on a career in law. Am I correct?

You are correct that you can prove A without having suspect B. But how will you procede legally without a responsible party?

And your evidence is very refutable.
 
jessicarabbit said:
Right heres the deal gravy:

If you show me hard evidence of OBLs involvement, I will immediately cease all CT activities and convert my film to one that supports the official version.
Click to expand...
Yet another straw man argument? Perhaps you're not aware of this, but bin Laden is not wanted by the US for his involvement in 9/11. You really should read the Commission report, rather than just posting pictures of it.
 
jessicarabbit said:
RWguinn didnt make the assertion, you did. I would be happy to discuss the finer points with you.
Click to expand...
You're a liar and a coward. You are unable to discuss the finer points with anyone.

Have you given any thought to why you lie so often? Does that concern you? Are you planning to change?
 
jessicarabbit said:
I don't have to provide a new suspect.
Click to expand...

You see, this is the very problem. Thats all you guys want do is point out anomolies and absense of evidence(or too much evidence, or faked evidence, etc, etc..). Can't be bothered to do any more....?

How about you people get your act together, come up with a coherent alterate theory that:
-reconciles all of your anomolies
-does not contain mutually exclusive sub-theories
-produces new suspects
-is supported by academia(y'know - peer review)
-is backed by testimony of real, actual whistleblowers(like those invisibombers)
... and let us poke holes in it for a change. Seriously, its been 5 years and there are ZERO alternate theories, why is that do you suppose? Could it be that the best one doesnt pass the laugh test?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom