Invitation for Java Man to discuss his 9/11 theory

excaza

Illuminator
excaza
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
3,593
So 9/11 was CD, please begin posting your proof. You seem to already have a firm idea of what happened that day, which means you have some material that you used to reach this conclusion. I don't want questions, I don't want to hear anything about the NIST report, I don't want quotes of people hearing loud noises. I want concrete, verifiable evidence and/or calculations showing that CD was the cause of the WTC collapse.

What explosives were used, how much explosive material was required, where is the proof of explosives (residue, det cord, unexploded material, etc), where were they planted, how long did it take to prep the buildings, who prepped them, how were they prepped without anybody noticing, why there was the need to CD them in the first place, etc.

The only thing I've seen from the truther camp about this is incredulity. "The towers couldn't have collapsed like that because of airplanes!!!"

I'm more than willing to accept CD, but there has been no evidence to support it. It's been 9 years, how much longer do we have to wait?
 
excaza said:
So 9/11 was CD, please begin posting your proof. You seem to already have a firm idea of what happened that day, which means you have some material that you used to reach this conclusion. I don't want questions, I don't want to hear anything about the NIST report, I don't want quotes of people hearing loud noises. I want concrete, verifiable evidence and/or calculations showing that CD was the cause of the WTC collapse.

What explosives were used, how much explosive material was required, where is the proof of explosives (residue, det cord, unexploded material, etc), where were they planted, how long did it take to prep the buildings, who prepped them, how were they prepped without anybody noticing, why there was the need to CD them in the first place, etc.

The only thing I've seen from the truther camp about this is incredulity. "The towers couldn't have collapsed like that because of airplanes!!!"

I'm more than willing to accept CD, but there has been no evidence to support it. It's been 9 years, how much longer do we have to wait?
Click to expand...

It was those ninja maintenance men with box cutters. They them der did rig dat building in 1993 but they didnt go off as planned. Jeb Bush then set up a homing beacon for them der remote controlled holographic aircwaft to not slam into dem buildings. I is sure dat is wot happened. Dont ask me how i am sure but i just am. If ya wont proof den jus look at all the internet stuff dat my m8ts have put up. All dose vidwoes on utube an that. Sure fire proof dat 911 woz an inside jobbyjob i tell ya.
 
excaza said:
So 9/11 was CD, please begin posting your proof. You seem to already have a firm idea of what happened that day, which means you have some material that you used to reach this conclusion. I don't want questions, I don't want to hear anything about the NIST report, I don't want quotes of people hearing loud noises. I want concrete, verifiable evidence and/or calculations showing that CD was the cause of the WTC collapse.

What explosives were used, how much explosive material was required, where is the proof of explosives (residue, det cord, unexploded material, etc), where were they planted, how long did it take to prep the buildings, who prepped them, how were they prepped without anybody noticing, why there was the need to CD them in the first place, etc.

The only thing I've seen from the truther camp about this is incredulity. "The towers couldn't have collapsed like that because of airplanes!!!"

I'm more than willing to accept CD, but there has been no evidence to support it. It's been 9 years, how much longer do we have to wait?
Click to expand...

Forever,judging by the truthers we get here.None of them have ever put forward a concrete theory.
 
I'm flattered excaza. My very own thread. Sorry I got here so late I was not aware of it until you posted that link in the other thread.
 
excaza, one of my main concerns is that a country that spends so much in defense (more than China, France, UK, Russia, Japan, Germany... etc together [aprox following 16 countries]) fails to prevent an incident like this and then fails to fully investigate it.
 
I don't care what your concern is. Answer the questions, they are specific.
 
Java Man said:
I am answering it and you're not concerned about it. Should we continue?
Click to expand...
No, you aren't.

This:
excaza, one of my main concerns is that a country that spends so much in defense (more than China, France, UK, Russia, Japan, Germany... etc together [aprox following 16 countries]) fails to prevent an incident like this and then fails to fully investigate it.
Click to expand...

Does not even remotely begin answering this:
I want concrete, verifiable evidence and/or calculations showing that CD was the cause of the WTC collapse.

What explosives were used, how much explosive material was required, where is the proof of explosives (residue, det cord, unexploded material, etc), where were they planted, how long did it take to prep the buildings, who prepped them, how were they prepped without anybody noticing, why there was the need to CD them in the first place, etc.
Click to expand...
 
Java Man said:
excaza, one of my main concerns is that a country that spends so much in defense (more than China, France, UK, Russia, Japan, Germany... etc together [aprox following 16 countries]) fails to prevent an incident like this and then fails to fully investigate it.
Click to expand...

This is the epitome of simple incredulity. It also assumes as a matter of course that the event wasn't fully investigated. I guess the first step is to 1- explain how defense spending could have prevented the types of attacks that happened, and 2- provide evidence that the event wasn't fully investigated.

You have done neither.
 
twinstead said:
This is the epitome of simple incredulity. It also assumes as a matter of course that the event wasn't fully investigated. I guess the first step is to 1- explain how defense spending could have prevented the types of attacks that happened, and 2- provide evidence that the event wasn't fully investigated.

You have done neither.
Click to expand...

Which can be discussed in another thread, or after the OP of this one is answered.
 
excaza said:
Does not even remotely begin answering this:
Click to expand...

Well maybe you should close this thread and open a new one called "Invitation for excasa to put words into Java Man's mouth".

If you're inviting me here to discuss my 9/11 theory then hear it out from A to Z. Don't jump straight into your assumptions.
 
Java Man said:
Well maybe you should close this thread and open a new one called "Invitation for excasa to put words into Java Man's mouth".

If you're inviting me here to discuss my 9/11 theory then hear it out from A to Z. Don't jump straight into your assumptions.
Click to expand...

I made 1 assumption: You believe it was CD. If you don't think it was CD, then say so. If you have seen enough evidence to convince you it was CD, then you should be able to answer all the presented questions.

Your thoughts on the quality of the investigation are irrelevant to what was asked:
I want concrete, verifiable evidence and/or calculations showing that CD was the cause of the WTC collapse.

What explosives were used, how much explosive material was required, where is the proof of explosives (residue, det cord, unexploded material, etc), where were they planted, how long did it take to prep the buildings, who prepped them, how were they prepped without anybody noticing, why there was the need to CD them in the first place, etc.
Click to expand...
 
excaza said:
Your thoughts on the quality of the investigation are irrelevant to what was asked:
Click to expand...

Yes indeed, but relevant to the discussion of my theory. Which so happens to be the purpose of the thread.
 
Java Man said:
Well maybe you should close this thread and open a new one called "Invitation for excasa to put words into Java Man's mouth".

If you're inviting me here to discuss my 9/11 theory then hear it out from A to Z. Don't jump straight into your assumptions.
Click to expand...

Please do. Right here and now.
 
twinstead said:
This is the epitome of simple incredulity. It also assumes as a matter of course that the event wasn't fully investigated. I guess the first step is to 1- explain how defense spending could have prevented the types of attacks that happened, and 2- provide evidence that the event wasn't fully investigated.

You have done neither.
Click to expand...

Seconded.
 
Java Man said:
Well maybe you should close this thread and open a new one called "Invitation for excasa to put words into Java Man's mouth".

If you're inviting me here to discuss my 9/11 theory then hear it out from A to Z. Don't jump straight into your assumptions.
Click to expand...

Please feel free to be the first truther here to put forward a chronological,coherent theory.
 
Java Man said:
excaza, one of my main concerns is that a country that spends so much in defense (more than China, France, UK, Russia, Japan, Germany... etc together [aprox following 16 countries]) fails to prevent an incident like this and then fails to fully investigate it.
Click to expand...

1st of all, no amount of money spent makes us absolutely immune from attack. In reality we aren't completely invincible, no one and no country is.

2nd, 911 has been investigated completely. In fact it is the largest most complex investigation in US history. You simply don't like the results and conclusions, so you tell this obvious lie that it hasn't been investigated fully.

So you have nothing but a delusion and a lie... typical...
 
Last edited:
twinstead said:
1- explain how defense spending could have prevented the types of attacks that happened, and 2- provide evidence that the event wasn't fully investigated.

You have done neither.
Click to expand...

1- isn't that the purpose of "defense"?

2- you've proven that quite well yourselves, by stating for example that NIST never investigated, modeled or studied beyond the collapse initiation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom