Top Ten Photos 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts Hate

1337m4n said:
Funny you should say that: the issue of 9/11 has already been in court. Our side won.
Click to expand...

NO, just some evidence not the official story itslef.

You would lose as soon as you are asked for the following evidence. Actual Photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.

But there is a lot more that can be asked for that you will not have.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
You would lose as soon as you are asked for the following evidence. Actual Photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.
Click to expand...

So any criminal trial where the prosecution doesn't have a photo or video of the defendant committing the crime is going to lose?
 
ULTIMA1 said:
You would lose as soon as you are asked for the following evidence. Actual Photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.
JoeyDonuts said:
So any criminal trial where the prosecution doesn't have a photo or video of the defendant committing the crime is going to lose?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


There is just no way argue with that kind of logic level of delusion.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
NO, just some evidence not the official story itslef.

You would lose as soon as you are asked for the following evidence. Actual Photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.
Click to expand...

So what?

For a shooting murder in a room full of photographers with cameras, does the prosecution have or need a picture of the bullet leaving the gun heading towards the victim to get a conviction?

No. The smoking gun and a bullet found in the victim that matches the gun is more than sufficient.

There is no picture of the bullet because nobody has their camera pointed in the exactly right direction because it's an uninteresting shot and because the chance that a camera clicked in exactly teh right millisecond is nearly zero even at 30 clicks a second for a video camera and it would be a blur,
if one did by chance and luck.

This is exactly like the Pentagon on 9/11. No matter how many security cameras we have around the Pentagon, only one shot camera got 4 fuzzy frames of an airplane going 500MPH.
 
Last edited:
That's the whole idea behind "beyond a reasonable doubt" in court. What U1 and others are doing is demanding things that aren't needed to establish that and are totally UNreasonable, and doing it not in to get to the truth, but in a transparent attempt to poison the well and win brownie points on an internet forum.

Courts understand that and would laugh truthers out. So do we.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
NO, just some evidence not the official story itslef.

You would lose as soon as you are asked for the following evidence. Actual Photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.

But there is a lot more that can be asked for that you will not have.
Click to expand...

At a major league ballgame, a place with a huge number of cameras, how many pictures of the ball do we have? Damn few. This is because (*) pointing a video camera at grass between home plate and the mound isn't very useful or interesting and (b) the ball will be a blur if it should happen to get into a frame.

That's exactly what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 and would probably happen today if another 757 tries to crash into it.
 
twinstead said:
That's the whole idea behind "beyond a reasonable doubt" in court. What U1 and others are doing is demanding things that aren't needed to establish that and are totally UNreasonable, and doing it not in to get to the truth, but in a transparent attempt to poison the well and win brownie points on an internet forum.

Courts understand that and would laugh truthers out. So do we.
Click to expand...

The twoofers have unreasonable doubt.:)
 
ULTIMA1 said:
NO, just some evidence not the official story itslef.

You would lose as soon as you are asked for the following evidence. Actual Photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.

But there is a lot more that can be asked for that you will not have.
Click to expand...

ALEXANDRIA, Virginia (CNN) -- Al Qaeda terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui should spend the rest of his life in prison for his role in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, a federal jury determined Wednesday.
 
BigAl said:
This is exactly like the Pentagon on 9/11. No matter how many security cameras we have around the Pentagon, only one shot camera got 4 fuzzy frames of an airplane going 500MPH.
Click to expand...

And the cabin, cabin windows and front section of fuselage can be seen in that shot.
 
Just out of curiosity. do airplane wheels even have serial numbers or other unique identifiers specific to the plane on which they were installed?
 
longfellow said:
Just out of curiosity. do airplane wheels even have serial numbers or other unique identifiers specific to the plane on which they were installed?
Click to expand...

I am waiting for Ultima1 to answer this. His stance on the wheel issue requires him to answer this. Please allow him to answer it.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
NO, just some evidence not the official story itslef.

You would lose as soon as you are asked for the following evidence. Actual Photos or videos of AA77 hitting the Pentagon.

But there is a lot more that can be asked for that you will not have.
Click to expand...

If only the defense attorneys in the Moussaoui trial had thought of the brilliant legal strategy of proving the crime of which their client was accused never actually took place! Especially considering how easy this apparently is to establish.

I guess the legal acumen of an actual lawyer is no match for that of a pretend NSA analyst.
 
longfellow said:
Just out of curiosity. do airplane wheels even have serial numbers or other unique identifiers specific to the plane on which they were installed?
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter.

The fact that these wheels didn't have serial numbers stamped on them means they were planted.

Kinda like the fact that, although controlled demolition doesn't cause buildings to free-fall, the fact that the towers did (which they didn't) makes it controlled demolition! It's so simple!
 
ULTIMA1 said:
NO they collapsed becasue the buildings fell on them, not becasue of debris.
Click to expand...

Say what??

Falling debris generated by a collapsing building is not the same as a collapsing building in what world?

Fact is that, if you bothered to read the NIST report, WTC 7 succumbed to the fires largely due to the way it was constructed with assymettric beam placement and beams that were only lightly bonded to the concrete floor pans which both allowed expansion of the beams to push the girder off its column seat in this long open span structure.

Similarily it was the method of construction of the towers that contributed greatly to the mode of collapse for them.

Structural damage to WTC 7 from impacts affected only the speed and some details of its collapse but did not contribute greatly to its having collapsed globally.
 
Last edited:
why does this guy (ultima) constantly tells others to "prove this isn't that"
EX:
ULTIMA1 said:
WRONG, you have stated the wheel is from AA77 it is up to you to prove it.

Show actual report that the wheel is from AA77 or admit you do not know what aircraft it is from.
Click to expand...

wouldn't the burden of proof fall on him to show that the wheel WASN'T from AA77?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom