Questions Truthers can't answer

Galileo said:
If the WTC was just half as damaged by collision and fire as you say, it wouldn't be so complicated, would it?

This is a classic example of a debunker holding two contradictory thoughts at the same time.

Thought # 1: The damage was so great, no explosives were needed.

Thought # 2: The damage was so slight, it would be impossible to have enough explosives.
Click to expand...

Is this what you are saying: that the evil doers knew that they wouldn't need that many explosives because the plane crashes would do the rest?
 
roundhead said:
Questions untruthers cant answer


1. Why was Atta carrying a passport on a one way trip to nowhere, he surely wasnt going to need it.And how did it survive intact. Why did he have luggage he intended to be on his flight, was he staying somwhere that night after impact.

2.Why did Burlingame hand over the controls of his plane to a 110 pound Arab with a box cutter.All his friends said he wouldnt have.

3.How did Bush's staff know he wasnt a target, they allowed him to hang around after the attack was in progress in the classroom. Then allowed him to take off without ANY escort in his plane.

4.How can four planes fly around and none be intercepted when its common that errant planes are.

5.Why did a leading General outright lie and say our radar systems were looking outward, not inward, a bald faced lie.

6.Why did the 9/11 commision outright lie about the composition of the building cores of WTC 1 and Two.

7. How did not a soul get fired.

8.Why did the commision ignore and not address scores of pertinent questions from 9/11 victims families.

9. Why did my Govt spend more money investigating Clinton getting a hummer , than on 9/11.

10. Why do people think its absurd that our Govt kills(or allows) its own citizens to forward an objective, when they positively did during the USS Liberty incident.

I can think of countless more, just tired of typing
Click to expand...

1. umm...hmmm...perhaps he needed it incase he was spot checked as a foreigner in America (on a visa or otherwise) and was requested to present it.
How did many things survive "intact" from these flights, or any flights that crash? Chance I say...chance. Luggage...perhaps to present himself as ordinary, travelling on a cross continental flight (hardly a same day business trip). I think he would stand out if he presented for such a trip with NO LUGGAGE.

2. Burlingame was likely strapped in, and I don't think the Arab (110 pounds??? who are you kidding) stood there and asked politely "please hand over the aircraft".

3. They had already cleared the site he was located at when the 2nd crash occured. It was likely safer for him there, in that only recently publicly disclosed location, then to move him. Why don't you ask the SS? As for the escort, I am assuming then that you have proof that doing so (A) actually occured, and (B) was in breach of standard protocol?

4. please show me examples of planes intercepted prior to 9/11 where their transponders have been deactivated, and contact lost with the plane. thanks in advance.

5. proof please.

6. proof please.

7. noone got fired because no one with firing privileges wanted to fire them.

8. What questions were IGNORED, and please show proof they were ignored, rather than looked at, but no answer provided to them (there is a difference).

9. You'll have to ask the USG.

10. USS Liberty....now I smell a sock puppet.

TAM:)
 
Galileo said:
Easy softball questions:

1)

Most of the explosives were not on the floors hit by the airplanes. Some of the explosives near where the planes hit did go off upon impact. Other explosives went off in between the impact and collapse, as evidenced by about 300 reports of explosions in the WTC.
Click to expand...

Didn't demolition expert, Brent Blanchard, say that the explosives would not be set off by the impacts of the airplanes, but rather that they (the explosives) would be destroyed by the impacts? The explosives would have also had to survive the fires in the impact zones. Doesn't fire destroy explosives?
 
~enigma~ said:
One and two are opinion. Before anyone believes #3 you are gonna have to provide evidence for your wet dream.
Click to expand...

#1

Willie Rodriguez and others in the subbasement had the bejesus scared out if them, so this is not an opinion, it a fact.

#2

Even NIST claims the collapse initiated from near the area of the plane impacts. (the collapse actually initiated from just below the plane impacts)

#3

The evidence is right there on the video, you can see rows 7 and 8 still standing after the explosives took out rows 5, 6, 9, and 10.
 
Why would the evil doers believe that a combination of explosives and a plane crash (keeping in mind that they would not know for sure where on the buildings the impacts would take place) would bring down a building when this had never been attempted before?
 
Galileo said:
#1

Willie Rodriguez and others in the subbasement had the bejesus scared out if them, so this is not an opinion, it a fact.

#2

Even NIST claims the collapse initiated from near the area of the plane impacts. (the collapse actually initiated from just below the plane impacts)

#3

The evidence is right there on the video, you can see rows 7 and 8 still standing after the explosives took out rows 5, 6, 9, and 10.
Click to expand...
1 doesn't mean what you think.
2. Is not evidence for you.
3.Standing rows mean the non standing were taken out by explosives? You sure have a real twisted way of thinking but i am not surprised with that delusion of being Galileo going on.
 
roundhead said:
Questions untruthers cant answer


1. Why was Atta carrying a passport on a one way trip to nowhere, he surely wasnt going to need it.And how did it survive intact. Why did he have luggage he intended to be on his flight, was he staying somwhere that night after impact.

2.Why did Burlingame hand over the controls of his plane to a 110 pound Arab with a box cutter.All his friends said he wouldnt have.

3.How did Bush's staff know he wasnt a target, they allowed him to hang around after the attack was in progress in the classroom. Then allowed him to take off without ANY escort in his plane.

4.How can four planes fly around and none be intercepted when its common that errant planes are.

5.Why did a leading General outright lie and say our radar systems were looking outward, not inward, a bald faced lie.

6.Why did the 9/11 commision outright lie about the composition of the building cores of WTC 1 and Two.

7. How did not a soul get fired.

8.Why did the commision ignore and not address scores of pertinent questions from 9/11 victims families.

9. Why did my Govt spend more money investigating Clinton getting a hummer , than on 9/11.

10. Why do people think its absurd that our Govt kills(or allows) its own citizens to forward an objective, when they positively did during the USS Liberty incident.

I can think of countless more, just tired of typing
Click to expand...

10 questions debunkers never answer!
 
Dr Adequate said:
Well, this one tends to stymie them. I've posted it three times, once as an OP ... zilch.

Originally Posted by Dr Adequate
"Suppose you have your new investigation. Suppose you yourself were given powers to subpoena witnesses, order the production of documents, look at the physical evidence, and so forth, within the normal limits of such inquiries.

Now, remember that if you ask GWB: "Were you behind 9/11?", then he will say "no" even if he was. Same if you ask Silverstein: "Did you blow up WTC7?", or order Rumsfeld to produce his Secret MIHOP Planning Diary. In general, we may assume that if there was a conspiracy, the conspirators will lie and cover it up. It's that sneaky way they have.

So, that being understood, which unanswered questions would you want to ask which people, which unscrutinized documents would you order to be produced, and which unexamined physical evidence would you like to examine, to determine whether 9/11 was MIHOP, al Qaeda, or al Qaeda plus LIHOP? (Note that if the new investigation doesn't resolve this issue for you, it's all a bit of a waste of time and money. What you need are questions that would expose the conspiracy if there was one.)

Thanking you in advance for your suggestions."
Click to expand...

Appoint honest people to head the CIA, FBI, and U.S. military, then order the heads of these departments to produce the documents that prove 9/11 was an inside job.
 
Galileo said:
10 questions debunkers never answer!
Click to expand...
Care to go through that list one by one and show how each is indicitave of an inside job and if you succeed in that then explain how each answer could only be the US government or an agency of....go ahead, this will be extremely interesting.
 
T.A.M. said:
1. umm...hmmm...perhaps he needed it incase he was spot checked as a foreigner in America (on a visa or otherwise) and was requested to present it.
How did many things survive "intact" from these flights, or any flights that crash? Chance I say...chance. Luggage...perhaps to present himself as ordinary, travelling on a cross continental flight (hardly a same day business trip). I think he would stand out if he presented for such a trip with NO LUGGAGE.

2. Burlingame was likely strapped in, and I don't think the Arab (110 pounds??? who are you kidding) stood there and asked politely "please hand over the aircraft".

3. They had already cleared the site he was located at when the 2nd crash occured. It was likely safer for him there, in that only recently publicly disclosed location, then to move him. Why don't you ask the SS? As for the escort, I am assuming then that you have proof that doing so (A) actually occured, and (B) was in breach of standard protocol?

4. please show me examples of planes intercepted prior to 9/11 where their transponders have been deactivated, and contact lost with the plane. thanks in advance.

5. proof please.

6. proof please.

7. noone got fired because no one with firing privileges wanted to fire them.

8. What questions were IGNORED, and please show proof they were ignored, rather than looked at, but no answer provided to them (there is a difference).

9. You'll have to ask the USG.

10. USS Liberty....now I smell a sock puppet.

TAM:)
Click to expand...


1. You arent convincing in the least.

2.Burlingame was a big guy, and could take care of himself, Hani has been oft described as very small. Burlingame never got off highjack code, and i would expect would have tried to fend this guy or guys off and issued a highjack code.
We have good ole Barbara saying he was in the back of the plane with the others........

3.Cleared what site.*(No military aircraft took up station) even stayed at the school, left a while later, went to his plane and left unescorted. Griffin reported this unescorted plane scenario and referenced it, i dont have it in front of me. That said, Bush had recieved reports of a number of airplanes in the air that could be suspect when he left unescorted.I find that EXTREMELY odd.

4.I read a well scouced article just the other day discussing Canada taking over its airspace, what it is capable of , and referencing US abilities.

No transponder??? Your kidding right?...Not having a transponder on doesnt make a flight invisible. Any aircraft in recent history involving the military thats attacking DOESNT have a transponder. Your saying we cant find such a plane??
Anybody except maybe the Red Baron would laugh at that:), or those of his time.

Study up on the Jersey girls and they're comments regarding how they feel about how many unanswered question they had.


Regarding the Liberty, i am an ex sailor. The front page article from 2007 in the Chicago Tribune is a good place to get a quick education regarding they're fate.

US military patriots getting machine gunned at 50 yards doesnt set well with me, and never will. Sorry if you feel differently.

To a man, the crew of that ship sings out of the same hymnbook, you dont believe them? Or the court of Inquiry officer who backs them 100%.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom