9/11 Multiple Choice for CTists and Truthers

[Oliver]

Well, somehow i feeled adressed. Anyway, no badges - no answers.

What type of Badge do you mean?

The MHP "Let´s blame da Joooooooooooooooos"-Badge?

 

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Are we sposed to answer based on intuition and general opinion, based on what (limited and incorrect, I'm sure) knowledge we have? Or do you want proof for every answer?

Is this a survey to find out "how the other half thinks," or a trap?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Topic #1 - The Hijackers/Al-Qaeda
------------------------------------

Q1. Which of the following options best describes your thoughts on the role of the 19 alleged hijackers involved in the 9/11 attacks?

(A) They were terrorists, members of Al-Qaeda, and carried out the attacks of 9/11.
(B) They were Jihadists, but patsies, set up by elements of the USG to be the scapegoats for the 9/11 attacks.
(C) They were operatives working for the CIA.
(D) They fictional people, that did not exist, whose histories were made up by elements of the USG in order to explain/account for the attacks.
(E) Other (please explain).


TAM

A

Topic #1 - The Hijackers/Al-Qaeda
------------------------------------

Q2. With regards to OBL (Osama Bin Laden), which best describes your view on his role in 9/11 and in Al-Qaeda in general?

(A) OBL was/is the leader of Al-Qaeda, and was, as its leader, responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
(B) OBL was/is the leader of Al-Qaeda, but was not involved in the attacks.
(C) OBL was/is a CIA operative or informant, who has helped co-ordinate attacks under the name of "Al-Qaeda", while secretly doing so for the USG.
(D) OBL is a fictional character created by the USG to explain the terrorist attacks, and on film and audio is played by a hired actor/shill.
(E) Other (Please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #1 - The Hijackers/Al-Qaeda
------------------------------------

Q3. KSM's (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) role in 9/11 is best described by which of the following statements?

(A) KSM was a member of the terrorist organization "Al-Qaeda", and was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks.
(B) KSM was a member of Al-Qaeda, but his role in 9/11 was that of a patsie.
(B) KSM is an innocent man of arab origins, whom was captured by the USA, and then torchered into false confessions about his roll in 9/11.
(D) KSM is a CIA operative or informant who helped facilitate the stories and/or circumstances of the role of "Al-Qaeda" in the 9/11 attacks, so as to provide a cover story for the real perpetrators, the USG.
(E) Other (Please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #1 - The Hijackers/Al-Qaeda
------------------------------------

Q4. The role of Ramzi Binalshibh in the attacks of 9/11, is best described by which of the following statements?

(A) He was a terrorist, a member of Al-Qaeda, and was responsible for co-ordinating elements of the attacks of 9/11 from his location in europe.
(B) He was a member of Al-Qaeda, but had no role in the 9/11 attacks.
(C) He was an innocent man of arab origins who was framed by the USG for a role in the 9/11 attacks.
(D) He was a CIA Operative or Informant who helped create/fabricate the eivdence linking Al-qaeda and the arab hijackers to the attacks, as a front to protect the real perpetrators, the USG.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

E - not familiar with him, so no answer

Topic #1 - The Hijackers/Al-Qaeda
------------------------------------

Q5. With regards to the funding of the Al-Qaeda Terrorists responsible for 9/11, which best describes your beliefs on the matter? For this question, you may choose more than one.

(A) They were funded by OBL and his backers, through Al-Qaeda's own funds.
(B) They were funded by malicious elements from Saudi Arabia.
(C) They were funded by malicious elements of Pakistan.
(D) They were funded by the USG or elements from the USA.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

A, thought B & C are possible, though I haven't seen evidence indicating such

Topic #1 - The Hijackers/Al-Qaeda
------------------------------------

Q6. With regards to Zacarias Moussaoui, which of the following statements best decribes your opinion on his role in the 9/11 attacks?

(A) He was an active member of Al-Qaeda, and was at the last moment considered to be a substitute terrorist involved in the 9/11 attacks, but this was not carried through.
(B) He was an active member of Al-Qaeda, who was part of an alternate/future attack on the USA, but was used as a scapegoat wrt 9/11.
(C) He was a member of Al-Qaeda, and helped co-ordinate the attacks of 9/11 from within the USA.
(D) He was a government operative who was used, as a patsie, and then framed for his role in 9/11.
(E) He was an innocent man that was wrongfully convicted for the crimes of 9/11, which he had no involvement in.
(F) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q1. With regards to the fate of the passenger of AA Flight 11, which best describes your opinion?

(A) They were aboard AA11 which crashed into the WTC. They were all killed in this crash.
(B) They were aboard AA11, which took off, but was diverted and landed while a substitute plane was launched to replace it. The drone plane crashed into the WTC. The passengers were then either killed or held prisoner by the USG.
(C) They were never aboard AA11, but rather were diverted prior to the launch of the flight, which from the outset was a passengerless remote controlled flight, which was then crashed into the WTC.
(D) They never existed. Their names are fictional, and their relatives are USG employees in on the cover-up.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q2. With regards to the fate of the passenger of UA Flight 175, which best describes your opinion?

(A) They were aboard UA175 which crashed into the WTC. They were all killed in this crash.
(B) They were aboard UA175, which took off, but was diverted and landed while a substitute plane was launched to replace it. The drone plane crashed into the WTC. The passengers were then either killed or held prisoner by the USG.
(C) They were never aboard UA175, but rather were diverted prior to the launch of the flight, which from the outset was a passengerless remote controlled flight, which was then crashed into the WTC.
(D) They never existed. Their names are fictional, and their relatives are USG employees in on the cover-up.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q3. With regards to the fate of the passenger of AA Flight 77, which best describes your opinion?

(A) They were aboard AA77 which crashed into the Pentagon. They were all killed in this crash.
(B) They were aboard AA77, which took off, but was diverted and landed while a substitute plane was launched to replace it. The drone plane crashed into the Pentagon. The passengers were then either killed or held prisoner by the USG.
(C) They were never aboard AA77, but rather were diverted prior to the launch of the flight, which from the outset was a passengerless remote controlled flight, which was then crashed into the Pentagon.
(D) They never existed. Their names are fictional, and their relatives are USG employees in on the cover-up.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q4. With regards to the fate of the passenger of UA Flight 93, which best describes your opinion?

(A) They were aboard UA93 which crashed in Shanksville after the passengers tried to take control of the plane. They were all killed in this crash.
(B) They were aboard UA93, which took off, but was diverted and landed while a substitute plane was launched to replace it. The drone plane crashed in Shanksville. The passengers were then either killed or held prisoner by the USG.
(C) They were never aboard UA93, but rather were diverted prior to the launch of the flight, which from the outset was a passengerless remote controlled flight, which was then crashed in Shanksville.
(D) They were aboard UA93 which was shot down by the US Military.
(E) They were not aboard UA93, which was a drone plane that was shot down by the US Military.
(F) They never existed. Their names are fictional, and their relatives are USG employees in on the cover-up.
(G) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q5. With regards to the phone calls made by the passengers of flight 93, which statements best describes your view?

(A) The phone calls were real, most made from Airfones on the back of the seats in the plane.
(B) The phone calls were real, but were made by actors using voice morphing technology in real time to fake the responses of the "passengers" to the questions of their relatives on the phones. They were not transmitted from the planes, but land based.
(C) The phone calls were fake, fabricated using USG operatives/employees as relatives of fake passengers, played by actors.
(D) The phone calls never existed, a complete lie.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q6. The passenger manifests for the flights involved in the 9/11 attacks have never been officially released to the public. Which of the following best describes why you think they have not been released?

(A) Because the true manifests do not contain the names of the hijackers, hence proving the "inside job" theory.
(B) Because they are the private property of the airlines, and hence they wish to keep them private for a variety of unstated reasons.
(C) Because they were part of the evidence in the Moussaoui trial, and now, as that trial is over, they should be released.
(D) The flights never existed, and so neither do the flight manifests, and hence the reason why no official manifests were released.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

B

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q7. With respect to Barbara Olson, a passenger aboard AA Flight 77 on September 11th, which best explains your view on her current/present condition/whereabouts?

(A) She was killed when AA77 hit the Pentagon.
(B) She was removed from the original AA77 and was subsequently murdered.
(C) She was removed from the original AA77, and was released, and recently spotted alive in Europe.
(D) She was part of the cover up, was never aboard AA77, and is now in hiding, and may have been recently seen alive in Europe.
(E) Other (Please Explain).

TAM

A

Topic #3 - Foreknowledge
-------------------------

Q1. Many have claimed that the USG had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Which of the following best describes your opinion on what foreknowledge they may have had? (for this question you may choose more than one)

(A) The USG was plagued with hundreds upon hundreds of "warnings" of terrorist attacks in the weeks and months leading up to 9/11. These warnings were vague, not listing when where or how the attacks would occur.
(B) The USG had direct knowledge that OBL was orchestrating an attack on the USA on US Soil, but did not know when or where or how.
(C) The USG had direct knowledge that the 9/11 attacks were coming. they knew when, where, how, and who. They purposely kept said knowledge secret.
(D) The USG orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, and so had full knowledge of all aspects of the attack including where when how, etc...
(E) The USG had knowledge of the attacks, including when where how and who, but the knowledge was lost amidst the noise/chatter of all the other hundreds of attacks warned off in the time leading up to 9/11.
(F) Other (please explain).

TAM

B

Topic #3 - Foreknowledge
-------------------------

Q2. Some claim that members of the Jewish community were told the attacks were going to occur, as well as where and when. Which of the options below best describes how you feel about this.

(A) I agree that some members of the jewish community knew the attacks of 9/11 were going to occur, before they occured, but they did not know when or where.
(B) I believe there were members of the jewish community who knew exactly when and where the 9/11 attacks were going to occur, and as a result avoided the WTCs and the Pentagon on 9/11.
(C) I believe that the jewish community had no more foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks than any other ethnic or religious group.
(D) Other (Please explain).

TAM

C

Topic #3 - Foreknowledge
-------------------------

Q3. Some people claim that members of the USG knew about the attacks of 9/11 before hand, and as a result, they rearranged or cancelled travel plans to avoid being hurt/killed. Which of the following best describes your view on this statement.

(A) I believe members of the USG were warned of the coming attacks, and did change/cancel travel plans as a result.
(B) I believe that members of the USG did change travel plans just prior to 9/11 but that this was just co-incidence.
(C) Other (please explain).

TAM

B

Topic #3 - Foreknowledge
-------------------------

Q4. In the months leading up to the 9/11 attacks, John Ashcroft quit using Commercial flights for travel. Which of the following best decribes your take on why this occured?

(A) John Ashcroft had foreknowledge of the attacks, and so stopped travelling on comerical flights to avoid the attacks.
(B) John Ashcroft was warned not to fly commercially due to an impending attack on america, but not told when, where or how. He heeded the warning and did not fly commercially.
(C) John Ashcroft decided not to fly commercially when on business do to reasons related to him specifically, but still used commercial flights for personal travel.
(D) Other (please explain).

TAM

C

Topic #4 - The WTC attacks
----------------------------

Q1. Which of the following best decribes how the attacks (not the collapses) of 9/11 on the WTCs occured?

(A) 19 Hijackers, most of middle eastern origin, hijacked AA11 and UA175 and proceeded to purposely fly these planes into the WTCs on 9/11 to attack the USA.
(B) 19 Hijackers, most of middle eastern origin, hijacked AA11 and UA175, but did not intend to crash them into the WTCs. Once they had overtaken the pilots, the planes were rammed into the WTCs remotely, the hijackers only patsies, and victims like the rest at this point.
(C) The passengers aboard AA11 and UA175, including the alleged hijackers were removed from the original flights, and drone, remote control flights were made airborne instead. These were the planes that hit the WTCs.
(D) No planes actually hit the WTCs, the crashes were CGI created aritificially, and then submitted to MSM for display.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #4 - WTC attacks
------------------------

Q2. Which of the following best decribes the explanation you believe for the collapses of WTCs 1 and 2?

(A) A combination of (1) damage to the steel support columns from the airliner impacts as well as (2) removal of fireproofing from the steel also caused by the impacts, and also (3) the multifloor intense fires ignited by jet fuel and then maintained and superheated by the building contents, all lead to the collapse of the buildings.
(B) The WTCs collapsed due to a "top down" Controlled Demolition using either Thermite/Thermate or conventional explosives, or both.
(C) The WTCs collapsed due to a "Star Wars" like energy or microwave beam weapon used to bring it down.
(D) The WTCs collapsed due to a combination of (A) and (B).
(E) The WTCs collapsed due to a combination of (B) and (C)
(F) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

Topic #4 - WTC attacks
------------------------

Q3. If you believe that the WTCs were brought down using a controlled demolition, which of the following best describes how you feel this was made possible?

(A) Explosive teams planted said explosives during the times when there were few or no people in the WTCs (late at night, and scheduled lock outs/evacuations).
(B) Explosive teams, disguised as maintenance crew, planted explosives while pretending to perform maintenence or construction duties within the buildings.
(C) The explosives required were pre-planted in the WTCs, done so during their construction in the 1960s.
(D) The explosives needed were aboard the jets that struck the towers.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

n/a

Topic #4 - WTC attacks
------------------------

Q4. Many people say they heard "Explosions" from within the buildings, after the planes hit the WTCs. Which of the following best describes the causes of the explosions, in your opinion? (you may choose more than one)

(A) The causes of the heard explosions were secondary explosive devices planted to help aid in the collapse of the WTCs.
(B) The explosions were caused by various contents of the building exploding, such as electrical transformers, aeresol cans, oxygen and nitrogen cannisters, other various electrical equipment, etc...
(C) The explosions were actually the sounds of the building in pre-collapse, and then the actual collapse itself.
(D) Other (please explain).

TAM

B & C

Topic #4 - WTC attacks
------------------------

Q5. It has been reported that prior to 9/11, there was never a single case of a STEEL FRAMED SKYSCRAPER collapsing solely due to fire alone. Which of the following comments best reflects your feelings on the relevence of this statement?

(A) The statement is solid evidence that the WTCs could not have come down as the USG and NIST say they did.
(B) The statement proves nothing, as the official story of how the collapse occured, has fire listed as only one of a number of factors that lead to the collapse of the WTCs.
(C) The statement, as a precident is useless, as there has never been an occasion prior to 9/11 when a commerical jet airliner as big as those used in 9/11 has crashed into a steel framed skyscraper at speeds in excess of 400 mph.
(D) Other (please explain).

TAM

B & C

Topic #4 - WTC attacks
------------------------

Q6. There are many pieces of so called "evidence" that point toward Controlled Demolition of WTC 1&2. Of those listed below, which do you feel is the strongest in terms of proving the collapse of the WTCs occured via CD?

(A) Sulfur Residue on metal samples from the WTC.
(B) The buildings collapsed in NEAR "Free Fall" time.
(C) The temperatures of the fires were not hot enough to melt steel.
(D) The "Bathtub" of the WTC did not flood, along with half of manhattan.
(E) The buildings fell straight down rather than toppling over.
(F) Other (Please explain).

TAM

F - none

Topic #5 - WTC7
------------------

Q1. Of the factors listed below, which NIST has stated are the most likely factors contributing to the collapse of WTC7, which do you believe are false?

(A) An initial local failure occured on the lower floors (below floor 13) as a result of fire and/or debris induced damage.
(B) The initial failure progressed vertically up to the east penthouse.
(C) The large floor bays of the building were unable to redistribute the added load caused by the vertical progression of the initial failure.
(D) Damage via the vertical progression resulted in a horizontal progression along the lower floors (Floors 5 to 7) resulting in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

E - none

Topic #5 - WTC7
------------------

Q1. There has been discussion of how much physical, non-fire damage WTC7 actually incurred. With regards to this, which of the following statements best describes your opinion on the non-fire damage to WTC7?

(A) There is no evidence that there was any non-fire damage done to WTC7.
(B) There is only evidence of minor damage to WTC7, that done to the SW corner of the building only.
(C) There is good evidence that there was major non-fire damage done to WTC7 including a 10 or more storey hole dug out of the south side of the building as a result of falling debris from the falling of the 2nd WTC.
(D) Other (please explain).

TAM

D - C, except that the extent of the hole is in contention. I'm hopeful that the forthcoming NIST final report on WTC7 will provide more concrete information in that regard.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Topic #6 - The Pentagon
-------------------------

Q1. What do you think is the strongest piece of evidence that goes against the official story?

(A) Some photos that do not show much plane wreckage.
(B) The alleged poor flying skills of alleged hijacker pilot Hani Hanjour.
(C) The fact that the Titanium Engines were not found intact.
(D) That part of a light pole could pass through the front window of a cab nearby, but not damage the outer hood of the cab.
(E) That there are no sharp videos showing the plane, traveling at 500mph, hitting the Pentagon, but there are lots of videos of the planes hitting the WTCs.
(F) You have examined the FDR data from the black box of AA77 and have determined conclusively that the plane flew too high to hit the light poles.
(G) Other (please explain).

TAM

G - none

Topic #6 - The Pentagon
-------------------------

Q2. The Pentagon is the headquarters for the military of the most powerful nation in the world. With regards to the protection around said building, prior to 9/11, which do you believe to be true?

(A) The Pentagon was protected by batteries of hidden ground to air missile launchers.
(B) The Pentagon was protected by a squadron of fighter jets that do not have to take orders from NORAD/NEADS, and take orders only from the USG admin.
(C) The Pentagon is located in a highly populated city, and is located near the flight pathes of hundreds of civilian planes flying in and out of Washington DC. As a result, there was no extra protection for the Pentagon beyond military soldiers.
(D) The Pentagon was/is protected by multiple "Star Wars" type energy/microwave beam weapons.
(E) Other (Please explain).

TAM

C

Topic #6 - The Pentagon
-------------------------

Q3. Recently some have suggested that multiple witnesses have testified that they saw a large plane fly on the North side of the Citgo Station near the Pentagon just prior to the explosion there on 9/11. Which of the following best describes how you feel about this new claim?

(A) I think that the witnesses are remembering incorrectly, or were cohersed, and that AA77 flew to the south of the Citgo station just prior to hitting the Pentagon.
(B) I think that the witnesses are remembering incorrectly, or were cohersed, and that a plane flew to the south of the Citgo station, but it then flew over the Pentagon, dropping in a missile to cause the explosion and damage we saw on TV.
(C) I think that the witnesses are remembering incorrectly, or were cohersed, and that a plane, not likely AA77, flew to the south of the Citgo station just prior to hitting the Pentagon.
(D) I believe the witnesses and there testimony are valid and accurate, and that this earth shattering evidence proves conclusively that 9/11 was an "inside job".
(E) I think that the witnesses are remembering incorrectly, or were cohersed, and that there was no plane near the Citgo station or near the Pentagon on 9/11. The Pentagon was hit by a remotely launched cruise missile.
(F) Other (please explain).

TAM

A

 

[Anti-sophist]

I chose "(J) I don't know any answers and I don't answer questions. I'm just asking questions. This is why we need a new independent investigation."

 

[Yurebiz]

I'll be the first CTer to answer, yay for me.
I hope you don't mind I put Percentages on those i find most likely.. In any case just consider the one there's moar points, you know. It'll always be the top one.

Topic #1 - The Hijackers/Al-Qaeda
------------------------------------

Q1. Which of the following options best describes your thoughts on the role of the 19 alleged hijackers involved in the 9/11 attacks?
66% - (B) They were Jihadists, but patsies, set up by elements of the USG to be the scapegoats for the 9/11 attacks.
22% - (A) They were terrorists, members of Al-Qaeda, and carried out the attacks of 9/11.
11% - (D) They fictional people, that did not exist, whose histories were made up by elements of the USG in order to explain/account for the attacks.

Q2. With regards to OBL (Osama Bin Laden), which best describes your view on his role in 9/11 and in Al-Qaeda in general?
90% - (B) OBL was/is the leader of Al-Qaeda, but was not involved in the attacks.
10% - (C) OBL was/is a CIA operative or informant, who has helped co-ordinate attacks under the name of "Al-Qaeda", while secretly doing so for the USG.
I believe he wasn't involved just like he declared... I give 0% credit to the confession tape (he's fat, ugly nose, no sound, etc.), and yes, ironically, I do accept his tape more than the one given by the USG and the media. If he was responsible for it, I don't know wy would he deny so. Shouldn't he be proud of it? Also, in a more unlikely CT scenario he could be a chill, so thats a possibility too

Q3. KSM's (Khalid Sheikh Mohammed) role in 9/11 is best described by which of the following statements?
Skip! 'Never really investigated him, yet.

Q4. The role of Ramzi Binalshibh in the attacks of 9/11, is best described by which of the following statements?
Also skip. Sorry, (relatively) New CT here. I'm not used to the place yet, you know. Could you tell me where's the bathroom, btw?

Q5. With regards to the funding of the Al-Qaeda Terrorists responsible for 9/11, which best describes your beliefs on the matter? For this question, you may choose more than one.
80% - (D) They were funded by the USG or elements from the USA.
20% - (E) Other (literally, Other sources which I don't know about).
Considering the 9/11 Commission Report did not investigate the funding connections, I believe it would incriminate someone whithin the USG or with connections to it.

Q6. With regards to Zacarias Moussaoui, which of the following statements best decribes your opinion on his role in the 9/11 attacks?
Skip...haven't really looked into him yet.. I could guess he's a patsie but I'd have to do some homework first.

Topic #2 - The Passengers of the 9/11 flights
--------------------------------------------

Q1. With regards to the fate of the passenger of AA Flight 11, which best describes your opinion?
100% - (A) They were aboard AA11 which crashed into the WTC. They were all killed in this crash.

Q2. With regards to the fate of the passenger of UA Flight 175, which best describes your opinion?
100% - (A) They were aboard UA175 which crashed into the WTC. They were all killed in this crash.

Q3. With regards to the fate of the passenger of AA Flight 77, which best describes your opinion?
65% - (A) They were aboard AA77 which crashed into the Pentagon. They were all killed in this crash.
35% - (B) They were aboard AA77, which took off, but was diverted and landed while a substitute plane was launched to replace it. The drone plane crashed into the Pentagon. The passengers were then either killed or held prisoner by the USG.
I can't help but consider it might have been a different plane crashing. The evidence leading to a Boeing 757 is dubious, but I have no reasons to believe the passengers were not killed. The whole argument for a CT is more dubious than the official story, due to a series of circular arguments about the meaning of doing such a thing (they could simply have crashed the frigging Boeing in it), so I do stick with the official more on this one

Q4. With regards to the fate of the passenger of UA Flight 93, which best describes your opinion?
80% - (A) They were aboard UA93 which crashed in Shanksville after the passengers tried to take control of the plane. They were all killed in this crash.
20% - (G) Other (They were aboard UA93 which was redirected somewhere else, where they were killed or held prisoner by the USG. The plane debris found at Shanksville was implanted at the site beforehand).
Same as with the Pentagon, but a bit worse for the CT side. (sorry Killtown, lol)

Q5. With regards to the phone calls made by the passengers of flight 93, which statements best describes your view?
85% - (A) The phone calls were real, most made from Airfones on the back of the seats in the plane.
15% - (C) The phone calls were fake, fabricated using USG operatives/employees as relatives of fake passengers, played by actors.
Some of them are really funny to be looked at with CTer's eyes. But there's no evidence whatsoever, so credit goes to the OCT

Q6. The passenger manifests for the flights involved in the 9/11 attacks have never been officially released to the public. Which of the following best describes why you think they have not been released?
100% - (B) Because they are the private property of the airlines, and hence they wish to keep them private for a variety of unstated reasons.
Hum.. no evidence otherwise...

Q7. With respect to Barbara Olson, a passenger aboard AA Flight 77 on September 11th, which best explains your view on her current/present condition/whereabouts?
Skip, I have no idea who she is, lol.

Topic #3 - Foreknowledge
-------------------------

Q1. Many have claimed that the USG had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks. Which of the following best describes your opinion on what foreknowledge they may have had? (for this question you may choose more than one)
(ehm what the hell, I've been choosing more than one all along )
50% - (C) The USG had direct knowledge that the 9/11 attacks were coming. they knew when, where, how, and who. They purposely kept said knowledge secret.
30% - (D) The USG orchestrated the 9/11 attacks, and so had full knowledge of all aspects of the attack including where when how, etc...
20% - (E) The USG had knowledge of the attacks, including when where how and who, but the knowledge was lost amidst the noise/chatter of all the other hundreds of attacks warned off in the time leading up to 9/11.

Q2. Some claim that members of the Jewish community were told the attacks were going to occur, as well as where and when. Which of the options below best describes how you feel about this.
100% - (A) I agree that some members of the jewish community knew the attacks of 9/11 were going to occur, before they occured, but they did not know when or where.
The whole point about "jewish community" is really vague, but yeah, I heard something about that on the AJ show (Holy kook, bite me!), a guy who heard some jews talking about something happening in September of 2001, in a cemetery I-don't-remember-where. I couldn't care less about this subject, thought. I'm not anti semite nor against zionists or any of the like.

Q3. Some people claim that members of the USG knew about the attacks of 9/11 before hand, and as a result, they rearranged or cancelled travel plans to avoid being hurt/killed. Which of the following best describes your view on this statement.
75% - (A) I believe members of the USG were warned of the coming attacks, and did change/cancel travel plans as a result.
25% - (B) I believe that members of the USG did change travel plans just prior to 9/11 but that this was just co-incidence.
Could be a mix of the two also... I dunno, quite the moot point of an argument. For any side.

Q4. In the months leading up to the 9/11 attacks, John Ashcroft quit using Commercial flights for travel. Which of the following best decribes your take on why this occured?
Skip, I don't know the guy, nor am interested in researching that.

Topic #4 - The WTC attacks
----------------------------

Q1. Which of the following best decribes how the attacks (not the collapses) of 9/11 on the WTCs occured?

100% - (A) 19 Hijackers, most of middle eastern origin, hijacked AA11 and UA175 and proceeded to purposely fly these planes into the WTCs on 9/11 to attack the USA.
Um, they can't be patsies if they were intending to crash on the WTC Towers?

Q2. Which of the following best decribes the explanation you believe for the collapses of WTCs 1 and 2?
70% - (A) A combination of (1) damage to the steel support columns from the airliner impacts as well as (2) removal of fireproofing from the steel also caused by the impacts, and also (3) the multifloor intense fires ignited by jet fuel and then maintained and superheated by the building contents, all lead to the collapse of the buildings.
30% - (D) The WTCs collapsed due to a combination of (A) and (B).
Since there were no clear sounds of explosions during the collapse, can't help but agree with the experts... There's no reason to argue, as a layman, against Experts; as much as I believe they could be "payed off" or whatever, It's just meaningless. Until a significant ammount experts argue for a "D" or "B" option, I respectfully won't consider it to be pejoratively probable.

Q3. If you believe that the WTCs were brought down using a controlled demolition, which of the following best describes how you feel this was made possible?
66% - (A) Explosive teams planted said explosives during the times when there were few or no people in the WTCs (late at night, and scheduled lock outs/evacuations).
33% - (B) Explosive teams, disguised as maintenance crew, planted explosives while pretending to perform maintenence or construction duties within the buildings.

Q4. Many people say they heard "Explosions" from within the buildings, after the planes hit the WTCs. Which of the following best describes the causes of the explosions, in your opinion? (you may choose more than one)
50% - (B) The explosions were caused by various contents of the building exploding, such as electrical transformers, aeresol cans, oxygen and nitrogen cannisters, other various electrical equipment, etc...
30% - (C) The explosions were actually the sounds of the building in pre-collapse, and then the actual collapse itself.
20% - (A) The causes of the heard explosions were secondary explosive devices planted to help aid in the collapse of the WTCs.
Little proof for an "A". Except the basement explosions, which were indeed weird, but could have been coincidence; some other source exploding, or the magic jetfuel, whatever. I don't really care for that either.

Q5. It has been reported that prior to 9/11, there was never a single case of a STEEL FRAMED SKYSCRAPER collapsing solely due to fire alone. Which of the following comments best reflects your feelings on the relevence of this statement?
100% - (B) The statement proves nothing, as the official story of how the collapse occured, has fire listed as only one of a number of factors that lead to the collapse of the WTCs.
Yeah.

Q6. There are many pieces of so called "evidence" that point toward Controlled Demolition of WTC 1&2. Of those listed below, which do you feel is the strongest in terms of proving the collapse of the WTCs occured via CD?
50% - (B) The buildings collapsed in NEAR "Free Fall" time.
50% - (A) Sulfur Residue on metal samples from the WTC.
50% - (F) Other (Unknown heat sources for the long-lasting Molten Metal found at GZ).
150% yay. I find them all relevant, can't really balance out... But still, all of them together isn't enough to prove above the NIST reports. The building's collapse speed was 40% obscured by the dust; The sulfur Residue may have occured in a small scale, which coincidentally happened right on the metal samples which were tested; The molten metal may have been aluminum from parts of the plane; etc. There's counter (cough, circular) arguments for any of the claims, and although they aren't really DEBUNKED as the OCTers claim, they aren't that enlightening for a CD either. So... there's no point.

Topic #5 - WTC7
------------------

Q1. Of the factors listed below, which NIST has stated are the most likely factors contributing to the collapse of WTC7, which do you believe are false?
100% - (A) An initial local failure occured on the lower floors (below floor 13) as a result of fire and/or debris induced damage.
Um, the others are just the chain of effects which happen after a damage has been inflicted on the structure. What kind of TRAP is this?
Of course, I refute that the RAGING FIRE was able to do such a thing. Fireproofing was not knocked off like in the Twin Towers, so there can't be an influence, unless it was hotter than 700 degrees Celsius, hotter tan the regular office fire. Which was no evidence of. The NIST tests concluded that insulated steel beams could not have had any strength loss in an office fire, not even if it lasted 10 hours, with a BLAZING INFERNO of 1000 degrees Celsius. I don't think fire played ANY part AT ALL. And if you argue over a natural collapse, you gotta take the debris damage into full consideration. I believe the NIST will do so in the final report. Or so I HOPE. Because if they say "fire helped the core columns sag and pull the trusses and outer columns inward" I'll be frigging MAD.

Q2. There has been discussion of how much physical, non-fire damage WTC7 actually incurred. With regards to this, which of the following statements best describes your opinion on the non-fire damage to WTC7?
70% - (B) There is only evidence of minor damage to WTC7, that done to the SW corner of the building only.
30% - (C) There is good evidence that there was major non-fire damage done to WTC7 including a 10 or more storey hole dug out of the south side of the building as a result of falling debris from the falling of the 2nd WTC.
There's no visual evidence for (C), only testimonies. I've only seen pictures showing (B), but I'll be nice and consider (C) too.

Topic #6 - The Pentagon
-------------------------

Q1. What do you think is the strongest piece of evidence that goes against the official story?
100% - (F) You have examined the FDR data from the black box of AA77 and have determined conclusively that the plane flew too high to hit the light poles.
Um, yeah, the last JDX's video really got that... That's the strongest 'evidence' for sure.

Q2. The Pentagon is the headquarters for the military of the most powerful nation in the world. With regards to the protection around said building, prior to 9/11, which do you believe to be true?
Skip, never analyzed that, nor do I care.
Oh wait, I mean, this one:
(D) The Pentagon was/is protected by multiple "Star Wars" type energy/microwave beam weapons.

Q3. Recently some have suggested that multiple witnesses have testified that they saw a large plane fly on the North side of the Citgo Station near the Pentagon just prior to the explosion there on 9/11. Which of the following best describes how you feel about this new claim?
Skip, never heard about it.

---------------------------
DONE

I'll try to look over those questions I skipped, then maybe I'll answer then later someday.

 

[apathoid]

You don't sound like much of a Twoofer Yurebiz

Welcome to the forum.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

You don't sound like much of a Twoofer Yurebiz

Welcome to the forum.

You might want to reread Yurebiz's answers.

 

[T.A.M.]

Arkan:

Thanks for replying, although the test is meant for CTers/truthers, you scored as I would expect you to...good.

Yurebiz:

Thanks for taking the quiz. Based on your answers I can tell you are (1) Not a hard core CTer (2) New to the 9/11 CT in general, (3) salvagable if we show you evidence on some issues.

Your taking the test, and your honest answers prove to me there is some validity in the quiz if used for the purposes I intended, which was to sort out the Full blown CTers from the fence sitters or those who have just been taken in by various CT type dogma. In so doing, I can now better discuss with you certain topics, knowing I may be able to convince you on things, as opposed to the full blown CTist, whom I argue with simply to provide the facts for those who look on (the lurkers).

TAM

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Arkan:

Thanks for replying, although the test is meant for CTers/truthers, you scored as I would expect you to...good.
<snip>TAM

What can I say; transparency is the best policy.

 

[Yurebiz]

You don't sound like much of a Twoofer Yurebiz

Welcome to the forum.

Thank you.
I'm a twoofer though. I just respect the work done here, to some degree. Most CTists don't like to admit they can be wrong. I don't think that's being honest in trying to find the truth, hence there's no hard evidence on your side. I try to be the most honest tho I sometimes slip out to the twoofer dimension sometimes. Quite often really, I even held back my CTist-senses on the quiz, haha

Yurebiz:

Thanks for taking the quiz. Based on your answers I can tell you are (1) Not a hard core CTer (2) New to the 9/11 CT in general, (3) salvagable if we show you evidence on some issues.

Your taking the test, and your honest answers prove to me there is some validity in the quiz if used for the purposes I intended, which was to sort out the Full blown CTers from the fence sitters or those who have just been taken in by various CT type dogma. In so doing, I can now better discuss with you certain topics, knowing I may be able to convince you on things, as opposed to the full blown CTist, whom I argue with simply to provide the facts for those who look on (the lurkers).

TAM

Cool. I'd like to see others CTers taking it too so I could compare myself to them.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

<snip> I just respect the work done here, to some degree. Most CTists don't like to admit they can be wrong. I don't think that's being honest in trying to find the truth, hence there's no hard evidence on your side. I try to be the most honest tho I sometimes slip out to the twoofer dimension sometimes.<snip>

Thank you. During my shortlived account time on LCF v.1 that was something I tried to impress upon them that they never got. Even if they, or you, completely disagree with me, you can apply my criticisms to your case. Now, they will either strengthen your case, or cause it to fall apart. Either way is beneficial though. Burying your head in the sand and ignoring your critics is counter-productive.

 

[negativ]

If I may ask, Yurebiz, how old are you? If this has been addressed elsewhere, I missed it and I apologize.

I ask because -- and I don't mean this as a slam -- you seem to convey a certain amount of flippancy that isn't really appropriate given the subject. I'll speculate that this may be because you lack a real concrete psychological connection to the events of that day.

That would be perfectly understandable and somewhat expected if you were, let's say, 15 or so. 9/11/01 was over 5 years ago -- more than one third of a 15 year old's lifespan, and my guess is that most 10 year-olds were not [permitted to be] glued to 24-hour TV news channels, never mind having only barely begun to reach a stage of cognitive development that would allow the full magnitude of that event to be processed.

If I'm totally off-base, then never mind. It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

Just Asking Questions™, ya know.

 

[apathoid]

You might want to reread Yurebiz's answers.

I didnt say he wasnt a Twoofer, I said he wasn't much of one

He believes hijackers flew the planes into the WTCs.
His leading belief on the Towers is a gravity driven collapse.
His leading belief on the Pentagon is that Flight 77 hit it.
His leading belief on Flight 93 is that passengers forced it down.

Those beliefs make Yurebiz the least batty Twoofer we've encountered yet(apologies to CLE, who held the title previously)
Heck, he may even join us on the dark side eventually. Stick around Yurebiz

 

[maccy]

If I may ask, Yurebiz, how old are you? If this has been addressed elsewhere, I missed it and I apologize.

I ask because -- and I don't mean this as a slam -- you seem to convey a certain amount of flippancy that isn't really appropriate given the subject. I'll speculate that this may be because you lack a real concrete psychological connection to the events of that day.

That would be perfectly understandable and somewhat expected if you were, let's say, 15 or so. 9/11/01 was over 5 years ago -- more than one third of a 15 year old's lifespan, and my guess is that most 10 year-olds were not [permitted to be] glued to 24-hour TV news channels, never mind having only barely begun to reach a stage of cognitive development that would allow the full magnitude of that event to be processed.

If I'm totally off-base, then never mind. It certainly wouldn't be the first time.

Just Asking Questions™, ya know.

A couple of revealing quotes from Yurebiz's posts:

Hay guys! New Woowoo here.

A little background:
18 years-old, non-us-citizen who lives in PA, still in high school and living with parents, been following the 9-11 CT story for over a year, needs to get out more, complete waste of life, etc. A TRUE CTer, like some might say.

I hope I can be of entertainment for you while I’m here. I’m a CT watchdog: spend most of my time lurking forums/bloggers/nutjob sites like crazy, looking for different points of views and theories. Actually, I’ve been lurking this particular forum for over 3 months already.
I probably won’t be arguing much though, since I lack teh Engrish skillz, and also have roughly 0 credibility to begin with. But I’ll try posting some (YOUTUBE, LAWLS) videos and making a couple questions (like any other CTer, haha) when I see fit.

The thing about "entertaining" is, for my defense, a cultural thing from my homeland. The government back there (I won't say where, cuz you'll laugh at me, boo hoo) is far more corrupt than the US Government. Everyone got to the point to blame anything and everything that occurs to the recently elected top officials (yeah, presidents, governors, etc., are al elected there. It's a type of democracy which was duped from the US, only MORE flawed. We have had eletronic voting for years now, also.). And it's not just a funny costume, it's like everyone knows the government cheats the citizens. The sad thing, is that since it's so well introduced in the community, no one does [rule 8] besides laughing about it. They could make rallies and protest when every other big scandal happens (which is practically twice a year now), but everyone just sit backs and says "well I told you not to trust that guy! He's just as bad as the last one..."

I'm sorry if my attitude is somehow offending to you, I'm sure you are used to penalizing politicians way more than ..."there", so you take it more seriously as well, even rumors and conspiracy theories. I'll try refraining to sound like an ass who doesn't care about you...

 

[T.A.M.]

Topic #7 - Flight 93 and the Shanksville Crash
--------------------------------------------

Q1. In regards to the crash site of flight 93 near Shanksville PA, which statement below best describes your opinion on what happened.

(A) The Crash site and debris is consistent with what would be expected when a jet airliner crashes into the ground at a speed in excess of 500 mph.
(B) The Crash site has very few large pieces of debris, and as a result, there is no way a jet airliner crashed into the ground there. All debris was planted.
(C) The Crash site and debris is more in keeping with a plane that was hit by a missile while in air, and then crashed into the ground.
(D) The Crash Site does not exist, the entire story, witnesses included, is nothing more than a work of fiction.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Topic #7 - Flight 93 and the Shanksville Crash
--------------------------------------------

Q2. Allegations have been made that no human remains were found at the Shanksville site, and that this is proof of a conspiracy. Which of the following statements best describes your thoughts on this?

(A) I agree, there has never been any proof of human remains at the crash site, and this is solid evidence of an "inside job".
(B) There were human remains found at the site, as testified to by the medical examiner and the FBI that worked on the case.
(C) There was an article that quoted the medical examiner/coroner responsible for the site as saying there were no human remains at the site, but he was misquoted.
(D) As the crash site doesnt exist, neither do human remains at the fictional site.
(E) Other (please explain)

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Topic #7 - Flight 93 and the Shanksville Crash
--------------------------------------------

Q3. Reports have indicated that one of the engines from flight 93, or the reminents of such, were found hundreds of yards from the main crash site. This report, to you means which of the following?

(A) The engine was planted, as there is no way it could have traveled that far from the crash site...proof of an "inside job".
(B) The only way the engine could be found that far from the main crash site, is if the plane were shot in the air, exploded, and the parts scattered across a larger debris field.
(C) The engine being found so far from the main crash site is only indicative of the angle at which the plane hit the earth, the elasticity of the collision between the earth and the engine, and the speed at which the plane was traveling at the time of the crash.
(D) I am not a crash site expert, so I cannot comment on this particular report without arguing from ignorance.
(E) Other (please explain).

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Topic #8 - Who is Responsible
------------------------------

Q1. If 9/11 was an "inside job", which of the following do you feel are part of the cover up (you may choose more than 1)?

(A) Members of the BUSH Administration
(B) Members of the CLINTON Administration
(C) Members of the CIA
(D) Members of the FBI
(E) Members of FEMA
(F) Members of NIST
(G) Members of NTSB
(H) Members of FAA
(I) Members of NORAD
(J) Members of NEADS
(K) Larry Silverstein
(L) Members of the FDNY
(M) Rudolph Guilianni
(N) Wealthy Jewish Businessmen/Bankers
(O) Others (Please specify).

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

Topic #8 - Who is Responsible
-----------------------------

Q2. Of those listed in Q1 that you feel are responsible/culpable re:inside job, what punishment do you feel they should be given?

(A) Prison
(B) Execution
(C) A stern warning
(D) Fines and community service
(E) Other (please explain)

TAM