Questions for 9/11 Truthers

[beachnut]

I believe all four planes were hijacked by real people. They all ended up where the official story puts them. The phone calls from the planes are real, and reflect actual events on the planes. The hijackers were armed with guns as well as knives-- as indicated in several of the phone calls-- and were part of a sophisticated, well-planned operation far beyond the capability of al-Qaeda or any other Arab or Muslim group. The planes may have been piloted by the hijackers, or more likely, by a remote navigation system like Global Hawk.

The purpose of the operation was to frame Arab-Muslims for the crime of the century, and induce America to go to war in the Middle East.

Our President knew nothing of the attack, and today believes the official story told to him. High officials such as Rumsfeld and Cheney also were not involved in the attacks. Our military was not involved in the attacks. The NORAD standdown was accomplished by a very small number of disloyal officers-- maybe as few as one or two-- in the command structure who sent out garbled orders to the fighter pilots, making sure none would intercept any of the hijacked planes.

Please do not demand I "prove" every single sentence above. I was asked what I thought happened and, against my better judgment, I decided to reply.

NORAD is the military and they did not stand down. You are missing facts and you will never have any.

You have zero research ability as proved by your NORAD stand down lie.

Your ideas about the few officers is dumb. Prove it with facts. NORAD did not stand down. You are messing up real life with fictional minds making up lies about 9/11. Have you been in a coma for 5 years?

 

[Gravy]

A-Train, have you read the 9/11 Commission report? I mean, really read it?

 

[beachnut]

Your interpretation of what happened in Afghanistan is completely wrong. Al-Qaeda did indeed fight the Soviets there. But the Soviets were beaten by the Afghans, not al-Qaeda. It is the Afghans who have a legendary reputation for martial skill, not the Arabs. The Arabs have lost nearly every war they've fought since the early days of Islam. Their reputation for military incompetence is well deserved. Their contribution, via al-Qaeda, to such battlegrounds as Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya, is mostly as religious trainers. They are often laughed at and patronized by the real fighters they encounter in these nations.

No doubt Osama bin Laden raised a lot of money for the cause of various Muslim insurrections. He's was a rich man with a lot of rich friends in the oil-rich Gulf region. But raising money is a whole different thing from fighting a war, or orchestrating a complex, well-scychronized attack like 9/11.

Well scychronized! Bull!

Passengers won on flight 93 because the idiots were not on time!

There was just box cutters and terrorist; simple is best when it comes to new ideas. 9/11 was a simple idea and it worked because hijackings were always treated the way 9/11 unfolded. Period.

By the time 93 passengers attacked, all future hijackings in the US have changed!

I think it is fair to tell you that you are nuts and since the passengers of flight 93 figured out in minutes what you have perverted into lies over 5 years.

You are nuts proven by your posts of lies. Go ask a passenger of flight 93 what makes them smarter than you! You liar.

 

[Horatius]

The Arabs have lost nearly every war they've fought since the early days of Islam. Their reputation for military incompetence is well deserved. They are well known to be completely inept in all operations involving technology, logistics, coordination-- and they are the first to admit it.
...
But raising money is a whole different thing from fighting a war, or orchestrating a complex, well-scychronized attack like 9/11.

So, if that's all true, how do you explain the long history of Arab terrorists hijacking planes? If they cuoldn't pull it off on 9/11, why could they do it earlier?

Getting 19 people to the airport on time, only 4 of whom need any flight training, is a bit easier than planning an invasion. Why was the plan on 9/11 so complicated that they simply could not have pulled it off?

 

[beachnut]

Would anyone like me to continue?

Are you really dumb! You say one thing then go on to change sides and claim the other side of you argument. I can not figure out how you can be so wrong on both sides.

You say it was not such a complicated plan, then you say it was too complicated for Arabs!

You play both sides and you have no facts to support your lies.

The dumb statement I like is where you say you do not have to prove your lies!

You can not prove your lies. You are one dumb guy and Perry can help define that better.

This post was based on your ironic posts of no facts just lies. That is a fact.

 

[stateofgrace]

Your interpretation of what happened in Afghanistan is completely wrong. Al-Qaeda did indeed fight the Soviets there. But the Soviets were beaten by the Afghans, not al-Qaeda. It is the Afghans who have a legendary reputation for martial skill, not the Arabs. The Arabs have lost nearly every war they've fought since the early days of Islam. Their reputation for military incompetence is well deserved. They are well known to be completely inept in all operations involving technology, logistics, coordination-- and they are the first to admit it. Their contribution, via al-Qaeda, to such battlegrounds as Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Chechnya, is mostly as religious trainers. They are often laughed at and patronized by the real fighters they encounter in these nations.

No doubt Osama bin Laden raised a lot of money for the cause of various Muslim insurrections. He's was a rich man with a lot of rich friends in the oil-rich Gulf region. But raising money is a whole different thing from fighting a war, or orchestrating a complex, well-scychronized attack like 9/11.

No my interpretation of the Afghan Arab fighters is not wrong, yours is. Al Qaeda did not fight inside Afghanistan; it was formed as the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan. Equally so is you your underestimation of the influx of Arab fighters into Afghanistan.

UBL did take part in front line battles also but that is beside the point. The point is that Al Qaeda was founded at the end of this war from the Arab fighters that took part in it.

Are you suggesting that orchestrating a complex war against a super power like the Red Army was a walk over?

And yes there is no doubt that UBL raised billions and was a great logistics organiser in this war. He toured the Middle East continually, also raising funds for, what you believe to be a joke. He organised travel for foreign fighters to and from Afghanistan. He set up recruitment offices throughout the world, including the UK and the USA.

Please read a book or two, on the subject.

 

[Firestone]

Ok, Truthers always say that we have to connect the dots.

I'll do it.

A-Train's theory is:

I believe all four planes were hijacked by real people. They all ended up where the official story puts them. The phone calls from the planes are real, and reflect actual events on the planes. The hijackers were armed with guns as well as knives-- as indicated in several of the phone calls-- and were part of a sophisticated, well-planned operation far beyond the capability of al-Qaeda or any other Arab or Muslim group. The planes may have been piloted by the hijackers, or more likely, by a remote navigation system like Global Hawk.

The purpose of the operation was to frame Arab-Muslims for the crime of the century, and induce America to go to war in the Middle East.

Our President knew nothing of the attack, and today believes the official story told to him. High officials such as Rumsfeld and Cheney also were not involved in the attacks. Our military was not involved in the attacks. The NORAD standdown was accomplished by a very small number of disloyal officers-- maybe as few as one or two-- in the command structure who sent out garbled orders to the fighter pilots, making sure none would intercept any of the hijacked planes.

So who did it according to A-Train?
Not Al Qaeda, not Bush, not Cheney, not Rumsfeld.

Some "disloyal officers in the command structure" did it.

But who, if not Al Qaeda or Arabs has the capability for a sophisticated, well-planned operation?

Well, he said it before:

the evidence pointing to Israeli-Zionist direct involvement is overwhelming.

So the "Zionists", aided by some "disloyal officers in the command structure" did it, probably by remote control.

Score for this theory:
Originality: 0/10.
Evidence: 0/10.
Materially possible: 2/10 (courtesy of apathoid).

Well, that's actually better than most other 9/11-CTs.

 

[Kiwiwriter]

So the simple version of A-Train's theory is....

Ok, Truthers always say that we have to connect the dots.

I'll do it.

A-Train's theory is:

So who did it according to A-Train?
Not Al Qaeda, not Bush, not Cheney, not Rumsfeld.

Some "disloyal officers in the command structure" did it.

But who, if not Al Qaeda or Arabs has the capability for a sophisticated, well-planned operation?

Well, he said it before:



So the "Zionists", aided by some "disloyal officers in the command structure" did it, probably by remote control.

Score for this theory:
Originality: 0/10.
Evidence: 0/10.
Materially possible: 2/10 (courtesy of apathoid).

Well, that's actually better than most other 9/11-CTs.

The Jooooooooooooooooooos did it.

When in doubt, blame the Jews. Make them into inhuman, sadistic, clutching, grasping, caftan-clad, stinking, covetous, conspiratorial Satanistic monsters, hell-bent on the destruction of humanity...

...and then you can justify butchering them wholesale.

So, A-Train, the next questions I have are:

Are the Jews capitalist swine or Communist devils?
Did the Holocaust really happen?
How did they fake it?
Do they control the Civil Rights movement? The TV stations? The banks? The Communist Party?
And more importantly, what source do you like better for your anti-Semitism, Stormfront or National Vanguard?
Who's cooler, Kevin Strom or Jeff Schoep?
Which is a more effective way for anti-Semites to seize power:
1. Stand around in front of a Dunkin' Donuts in SA uniforms and yell "Sieg Heil!"
2. Post anonymous anti-Semitic e-mails to a discussion group full of people with IQs greater than 95?
Which member of your family abandoned you, forcing you to find a substitute family in a neo-Nazi organization, your mother or your father?
Are you familiar with the "14 Words?"
Have you ever seen "American History X?"
Have you actually read "Mein Kampf?"

And last but not least....

Do you actually know any real live girls?

Yeah, it's all ad hominem, but he started it with the "Jewish-Zionist conspiracy." I don't have time to waste on such folks.

 

[uk_dave]

The Arabs have lost nearly every war they've fought since the early days of Islam. Their reputation for military incompetence is well deserved.

Suez 1956?

 

[Calcas]

Thanks for replying, you're already ahead of all the regular twoofers we've seen here.

I agree with that.

At least this guy brought a "theory", which is more than 99.99% of truthers do.

And, we should address his "theory", point by point, to show him where he's wrong instead of calling him a liar. After all, if he really believes it he's not lying, just misguided.

 

[A-Train]

So the "Zionists", aided by some "disloyal officers in the command structure" did it, probably by remote control.

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

 

[aggle-rithm]

The Arabs have lost nearly every war they've fought since the early days of Islam. Their reputation for military incompetence is well deserved. They are well known to be completely inept in all operations involving technology, logistics, coordination-- and they are the first to admit it.

Military operations are a completely different animal from terrorist attacks. They are tactically, strategically, logistically, and idealogically very different. In fact, the only thing they have in common, really, is that both result in stuff getting blown up.

 

[aggle-rithm]

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

Was that not you who described as "honest and courageous" those who believed Israel and the Zionists were involved?

 

[uk_dave]

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

Are you an anti-semite nazi?
jaq

 

[DavidJames]

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

Hello Mr. Reading Comprehension did you not say:

the evidence pointing to Israeli-Zionist direct involvement is overwhelming

Yet you have no problems accusing (conveniently) unnamed persons of mass murder. That is typical of CTists.

 

[A-Train]

A-Train, have you read the 9/11 Commission report? I mean, really read it?

Yes I have... well, not cover to cover, I admit. My premier source for research, however, is Paul Thompson's Terror Timeline, which is also available on the web at the CooperativeResearch site. Also, Jim Hoffman's website 911research, mentioned above. My research has focused especially on the phone calls made from the planes. Like many others, I originally assumed they were faked, having been fooled by the Loose Change boys. Now I know they are all, or mostly, real.

I've also been informed by reading these books:

Among the Heroes Jere Longman
Through Our Enemies Eyes; Imperial Hubris Anonymous (Michael Scheuer)
Synthetic Terror W.G. Tarpley
Omissions & Distortions; Christian Faith and the Truth.... D.R. Griffin
Debunking 9/11 Conspiracies Popular Mechanics
The Terror Enigma Justin Raimondo

 

[Firestone]

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

Well, dear, I used YOUR WORDS, YOUR THEORY, YOUR CLAIM about OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE against the ZIONISTS.

You'll loose any libel case.

I didn't use the terms "anti-semite/Nazi", you make that one up.

It's true I didn't deal with your arguments. That's because there were none to deal with. Just unfounded accusations and a baseless theory.

Now, its up to you to provide this "OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE against the ZIONISTS". That's the name of the game here.

I'm going to bed now.
As usual the others will have all the forum-fun.

 

[beachnut]

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

Up to now you have not spread lies on the internet? Is this the truth of the matter.

You have posted no facts just lies about my fellow officers in the Air Force! No facts just telling lies about people you can not identify or have any evidence against.

Good job. Try again. (hire a lawyer you will need one if you actually say anything - you disrespect those who serve you! those people who would in a second step forward and turn in anyone who would do what you said was done!!! You need the lawyer for telling lies; do you? got facts?)

 

[Kiwiwriter]

Well...

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

We didn't smear you, you said it yourself..."Jewish/Zionist." So you can sue yourself. Anyway, as any real lawyer will tell you, to prove libel you have to prove that our statements were false, defamatory, and caused actual damage. You said it was a "Jewish/Zionist" plot, so we responded the way most of us around here respond to such idiocy.

And since you're the one who has the burden of proof in such a libel case, you'll have to prove that OUR reaction to YOUR statement caused actual damage to your career, life, reputation, income, and so on. Merely being "annoyed" is not enough.

"Loss Leader" and other legal eagles around here will explain it to you better. And as for the "decorum" on this site...if you come here with the kind of nonsense you're peddling, you'd better be wearing a suit of armor. Maybe over on "Stormfront" or "CODOH" they'll applaud and say, "Great post," but this is a slightly higher intellectual league. And we call 'em as we see 'em.

What...did you really think that if you spouted that guff we'd all applaud, or play a "debate game" with you according to your rules? Should I add, "dumber than a bag of hammers" to your description?

 

[Horatius]

I agree with that.

At least this guy brought a "theory", which is more than 99.99% of truthers do.

And, we should address his "theory", point by point, to show him where he's wrong instead of calling him a liar. After all, if he really believes it he's not lying, just misguided.

I agree, but of course, he also stipulated that we shouldn't ask him for any "proof". He's also not volunteered any.

His ideas also have the benefit of not needing to violate the laws of physics to be true, which are the ones that really annoy me.

And then we have this:

You know, you're lucky this is the internet, or I'd hire a lawyer and sue you for libel. I can only conclude that you didn't want to deal with my arguments and ideas, so you decided to smear me as an anti-semite/Nazi. Only you couldn't find any evidence of that, so you simply cooked it up out of your own head.

Up till now I'd been impressed with the general decorum on this site. Is this type of thing typical of JREF?

Once again, we have someone who chooses to ignore the polite and substantive posts, to rail against the few who are less than respectful, and to then paint all of us with a wide brush, as being "typical" of the JREF, as if any one posting style could be typical of such a diverse bunch as we.

So, A-Train, ignore the peanut gallery, and engage us in a real discussion. I've asked a few questions, and even if you are unable to convince me to agree with you, I'd still like to know why you believe as you do.