• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Flight 93

jammonius said:
Hey big al,

You are relying for a third time now on your foreign newspaper and myspace sources. OK, third time's the charm then. Those are therefore your best sources for your DNA claim. Your claim, therefore, fails.

We've already got enough in the thread on the Moussaoui trial exhibits and on what is or is not evidence and whether proof of 9/11 can be deemed to be established on the basis of what Zacharis Moussaoui "stipulated." As you know, he didn't have a trial as he copped a plea.

I'm going to pause here and resume tomorrow or Monday, posters; not that it matters, but just so you know. Speaking personally, I think we've made some progress today.

best
Click to expand...
You have proved you have delusions on 911. You ignore evidence and present lies and real dumb ideas, IE, jet engines are wheel-covers. Your credibility on this topic is beyond repair.

Present evidence the DNA is false. Prove it. If you can't prove it is false you have failed; If you can't present evidence you are telling lies. If you can't present evidence you need to stop posting disrespectful distortions. So far you have failed to provide any evidence; a complete failure to present evidence, which is indicative or your delusions and lies.

But you will not post evidence you will keep posting unsupported opinions based on idiotic lies (like - fuselage is a horse-trailer) and anti-intellectual statements off topic and useless to support your position, proved to be a complete fantasy by your own failure to supply evidence.
 
Hokulele said:
You understand the difference between track width and bucket width, yes?

The Komatsu you posted has a 60" bucket.

Take a look at a few 18" buckets, they look nothing like the one in the image you dispute. The hinge size, number of teeth, and width to height ratio are all wrong for anything smaller than a 30" bucket.
Click to expand...


he knows. he is a liar
http://images.google.com/images?hl=...h+excavator+bucket&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&start=0

and a moron
http://images.google.com/images?hl=...+cover&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&start=0
 
wargord said:
Why are we all still communicating with this moron? If we ignore him he will go away. He just wants attention. Discuss Flight 93 with intelligent people, not retards. Stop feeding the troll.
Click to expand...

Here is my secret of happiness, peace, and harmony:

51464b930aa31f56e.jpg
 
Hokulele said:
You understand the difference between track width and bucket width, yes?

The Komatsu you posted has a 60" bucket.

Take a look at a few 18" buckets, they look nothing like the one in the image you dispute. The hinge size, number of teeth, and width to height ratio are all wrong for anything smaller than a 30" bucket.
Click to expand...
He thinks the engine is as big as the Fan section and has no idea the fan section is in little pieces and the part buried is part of the core of 93's jet engine. He thinks an engine at 600 mph, impacts the earth and should be as big as the fully cowled engine. It is called failure. He can only identify horse-trailers, wheel-covers and he knows jet fuel does not burn.
 
beachnut said:
He thinks the engine is as big as the Fan section and has no idea the fan section is in little pieces and the part buried is part of the core of 93's jet engine. He thinks an engine at 600 mph, impacts the earth and should be as big as the fully cowled engine. It is called failure. He can only identify horse-trailers, wheel-covers and he knows jet fuel does not burn.
Click to expand...


He must be a very difficult person to play Pictionary with.

"No! That's a mouse! Can't you see the scaly wings?!"
 
Hokulele said:
You understand the difference between track width and bucket width, yes?

The Komatsu you posted has a 60" bucket.

Take a look at a few 18" buckets, they look nothing like the one in the image you dispute. The hinge size, number of teeth, and width to height ratio are all wrong for anything smaller than a 30" bucket.
Click to expand...

:dl:

I was waiting for someone to point out that the bucket was at least as large as the cabin.
 
the baloneyness! It Burns!

scrolling through his stupidity killed my wireless mouse, BRB after i dig up a pair of AAA's

Ok, On to the serial numbers. even though we know the fallacy he is committing, Call to perfection leading to infinite regression when that perfection is met. A serial number is simply a stamped number on a part. DNA however is unique How unique?
the FBI announced at
the Eighth International Symposium, and then at a Press Conference (reported in Science 278:1407, 1997) that “If the estimated probability of a DNA profile found in a
crime sample is less than 1 in 260 billion, and it is seen in a person, then that person is the source of the sample.”
Click to expand...
On flight 93 there were 33 passengers and seven crew. We know these passengers boarded a plane at Newark New Jersey. 120 minutes later a plane crashed nearv Shanksville PA, What did Wally miller recover there? DNA from the passengers and crew of that crash. How many unique profiles taken by wally miller at the crash site match the DNA profiles from those who boarded at Newark ? All of them. Thats right. 40 profiles that are common to 1 in 260 billion matched 40 boarding profiles that are unique to 1 in 260 billion at the crash site. This fatal to Jammonius's fantasy. Therefore he MUST detach these 40 matches which individually unique by a factor of 1 in 260 billion from the flight itself. By evading this question at all costs and waving the false demand for a simple scrap of metal with a number stamped on it. Which we KNOW that if it were produced, he will handwave away as "duplicated," "fabricated," "altered", or a "psyop.".

So his burden is this, To produce a scenario where intact passengers are reduced to hamburger and teleported to a scene 253 miles away 120 minutes later. You can't End of story.
 
Last edited:
tsig said:
There's plenty of proof but you don't want to see it.

BTW How did that big hole get there and where is fight 93 and all the passengers and crew?
Click to expand...

tsig,

A question is not proof. Your exact statement is:

"There's plenty of proof but you don't want to see it."

Your exact offer of and/or sourcing of validated proof is:

-0-

Over the last few pages, the discussion has focused on a second iconic photograph, the one that features a hydraulic excavator of indeterminate size as its most prominent feature next to a piece of junk that posters want desparately to believe is a jet engine, without being able to post a single source of the claim the piece of junk is a jet engine.

What is more, we are intended to presume that the hydraulic excavator of indeterminate size successfully extracted the piece of junk, but there is no known photo of the piece of junk fully excavated that would at least provide some way of saying for sure whether or not the darn thing is a wheel cover, something you'd expect to be found in a landfill, or something else.

Posters, I gather there's now a new thread claiming President Ahmadinejad has embraced 9/11 truth. I'm going over there for awhile.

Do you now see that the FBI has put you in the position where you must refute President Ahmadinejad with photos of 3 pink sun spots and of a hydraulic excavator of indeterminate size next to a wheel cover?

What are you going to do when not just Ahmadinejad, but when the rest of the world asks for proof? I don't think the 3 photos put on the second (not the first) list of prosecution exhibits in the Moussaoui trial are going to convince many objective people.

One thing that might be considered is the nature of the audience. It is one thing to convince americans of the common myth of 9/11, right? I mean the majority of posters here are American, with an occassional British citizen thrown into the mix, right?

Well, it is one thing to convince yourselves. You folks have to admit, don't you, that your level of required proof is not high. I mean, afterall, let's be honest here. You have relied vociferously, profusely and purposefully on:

1--A photo of 3 pink sun spots; and

2--A photo of a hydraulic excavator and an indecipherable piece of junk as proof of a jet crash; and

3--DNA evidence sourced to "myspace."

OK, so I get it. That is what it took to convince you. Now, just for a moment, put yourself in the position of looking over your own shoulder and ask yourselves:

"Have we set the proof bar too low?"

and

"Will others around the world who are skeptical of US actions and distrustful of US intentions (which, by the way, includes most of planet earth), be convinced by the Moussaoui trial exhibits that you have cited, or other bits and pieces of evidence that you can cite if you try hard, that the common story of 9/11 is true?"

What say posters about this?
 
Last edited:
911 CTers make panda very sad
sad_panda_2.jpg


Ok sure the wreckage recovered in the picture cannot be diffinitavely identified by this one image. But, the most logical assumption from the data in said picture is that of an internal part from a turbine jet engine. (and it looks like the compressor component situated behind the large signature fan blades. I would know because I worked on jets for more than a few years.)
 
Shadou said:
911 CTers make panda very sad
Click to expand...
Seconded. Why not just open a 'solipsism' sub-forum and have a number of 'pro-solipsism' votes that automatically move the topic there. This would leave jammonius with the JFK and bigfoot paraedolia people where he belongs.
 
jammonius said:
tsig,

A question is not proof. Your exact statement is:

"There's plenty of proof but you don't want to see it."

Your exact offer of and/or sourcing of validated proof is:

-0-


What say posters about this?
Click to expand...


I say that if you do your own research, as explained in post 894, then you can clearly link the evidence to official sources and in this case -directly to a defendent 'who copped a plea' by pleading guilty to his involvement. The criminal/case numbers etc relate direct to him. The hole in the ground. The engine. They relate direct to him and his trial. What did he say preceding and during his trial? Did he accept these photos as evidence against him? Did his lawyers accept them? Seek and you shall find.

Overturn that, convince KSM and UBL to retract and then prove the rest of your theory about ray beams and thermite etc then come back. So far all you have done nothing but talk -and talk crap.
 
Jackanory said:
I say that if you do your own research, as explained in post 894, then you can clearly link the evidence to official sources and in this case -directly to a defendent 'who copped a plea' by pleading guilty to his involvement. The criminal/case numbers etc relate direct to him. The hole in the ground. The engine. They relate direct to him and his trial. What did he say preceding and during his trial? Did he accept these photos as evidence against him? Did his lawyers accept them? Seek and you shall find.

Overturn that, convince KSM and UBL to retract and then prove the rest of your theory about ray beams and thermite etc then come back. So far all you have done nothing but talk -and talk crap.
Click to expand...

You say you can clearly link the evidence to official sources, but you do not do so. And, big al, does the opposite. In connection with proof of dna, big al linked us to a video copy of a copy posted up on myspace, of all places, that was nothing but a propaganda piece featuring video people claiming to be OBL and such like. In proof of a DNA claim, no less. That is very rich.

It simply won't do. Remember where this thread started, or close to its start point; Photo copies of photo copies of claimed flight manifests dated 10/4/02 faxed from goodness knows whom and faxed to goodness knows who.

I am not going to put you to the test of proof for that is fruitless. You won't, not because you may not want to, but because you can't. The evidence isn't there. However, I accept that you want to believe it is there.

Now, isn't that a fine kettle of fish?
 
Responses in bold.

jammonius said:
You say you can clearly link the evidence to official sources, but you do not do so. And, big al, does the opposite. In connection with proof of dna, big al linked us to a video copy of a copy posted up on myspace, of all places, that was nothing but a propaganda piece featuring video people claiming to be OBL and such like. In proof of a DNA claim, no less. That is very rich.

The DNA citation had no foreign press or Myspace citations. It was 100% American primary sources. Here's the link to my post that contains the citation.


It simply won't do. Remember where this thread started, or close to its start point; Photo copies of photo copies of claimed flight manifests dated 10/4/02 faxed from goodness knows whom and faxed to goodness knows who.
Click to expand...

There is a mountain of evidence that you refuse to read. Here is just a bit of it.

Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda Updated 5/22/09


http://911links.webs.com/index.htm

Table Of Contents
[1] NEWS (Jan 2001) Some See U.S. as Terrorists' Next Big Target
[2] (Jan 2001) ObL Tells Reporter that US attacks are comming.
[3] New York Times reports about al Queda about 89 times prior to 9/11/2001
[4] bin Laden quotes
[5] Al Qaeda: Statements and Evolving Ideology
[6] 1996: bin Laden declares war on America.
[7] ObL attacks on America prior to 2001 listed
[8] Specific attack warnings
[9] Bibliography
Al Qaeda Now - Understanding today's terrorists - Ed. by Greenberg
9/11 Comission Report Ch. 6.3
The Commission - The Uncensored History Of The 9/11 Investigation by Shenon, Philip
Messages to the world; The statements of Osama bin Laden translated by Bruce Lawrence
Congressional Report for Congress; Al Qaede: Statements and Evolving Ideology
The Power of Nightmares VIDEO (3 parts)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Nightmares
The Shadow Factory - The Ultra-Secret NSA from 9/11 by Bamford
PBS Nova Spy Factory
Ghost Wars by Cole
The Looming Tower - Wright
The bin Ladens by Cole
Spying Blind by Amy Zegart.

[10] 1998 ObL Fatwa calling for attack on the US
[11] Complete 9/11 timeline
[12] Answer to "bin Laden not wanted by FBI"
[13] US Government "Wanted" poster for biin Ladem
[14] KSM's indictment document
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
jammonius said:
You say you can clearly link the evidence to official sources, but you do not do so. And, big al, does the opposite. In connection with proof of dna, big al linked us to a video copy of a copy posted up on myspace, of all places, that was nothing but a propaganda piece featuring video people claiming to be OBL and such like. In proof of a DNA claim, no less. That is very rich.

It simply won't do. Remember where this thread started, or close to its start point; Photo copies of photo copies of claimed flight manifests dated 10/4/02 faxed from goodness knows whom and faxed to goodness knows who.

I am not going to put you to the test of proof for that is fruitless. You won't, not because you may not want to, but because you can't. The evidence isn't there. However, I accept that you want to believe it is there.

Now, isn't that a fine kettle of fish?
Click to expand...

I have told you before to stop pissing about and go direct to the source. You have been given direct telephone numbers to those sources. You prefer to continously piss about contesting internet evidence and wont change. Fine by me. You have done nothing to convince me otherwise. Did you call those numbers or have you just wasted another couple of weeks pissing about on here? You entertaining little truth seeker you. Keep up the good work. The internet needs you Andrew.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom