Warring No planer factions- Shansksville and Pentagon no-planers vs WTC no planers

triforcharity said:
I saw that too. Hopefully not too many people saw that. Good looking out Locknar.
Click to expand...

I quoted RedIbis and added
''I'll have to think about that one.For about a millisecond.''
It looks to me like the email was in his post. Mea non culpa.
 
In the end, it really doesn't matter if RedIbis agrees or disagrees that it's the debris of flight 93 at Shanksville, if he refuses to consider the following:

1. If it didn't crash at Shanksville, where is the plane? If you can't answer this, your idea that it's not the plane is stupid.
2. If it didn't crash at Shanksville, where are the passengers? If you can't answer this, your idea is even more stupid.
3. What possible motive would there be to fake a crash? If you can't answer this, your idea has moved from stupid to absolutely insane.

Any answers? Of course not. You'd rather ignore these inconvenient questions so you can hang on to your delusion. Until you can answer them, though, it's all rumor, supposition, personal incredulity, and willful ignorance.

Oh, don't forget insult to people you don't know. Like the passengers and their grieving relatives. Because they lied about what happened, right?
 
Government agent: Okay, Mrs Beamer, we've decided that your son is going to say "let's roll!" before the faked rush to the cockpit. We think it's the best thing since "remember the Alamo"

Mrs Beamer: But sir, Tod never says that.

Government agent: Not a problem mam. Just tell everyone he does. Nobody is stupid or sick enough to believe the loved ones are lying. It's PERFECT!

Mrs Beamer: Okay, I'll do it. When will the money be deposited in my bank account again?

Government agent: In due time, Mrs Beamer. In due time.
 
1337m4n said:
1) Do you agree that anti-air missiles cause planes to crash, not to disintegrate?

2) What is the object in this post?

3) There is a smoldering crater, or at least something that resembles a smoldering crater, in Shanksville. If a plane didn't crash there, why is it there?

4) If [insert NWO bad guy of choice] went to all the trouble to fake a smoldering crater, why did he not also plant huge chunks of airplane into said crater? If he didn't fake it, then why is that smoldering crater there?

5) If Flight 93 did not crash in said smoldering crater, does it still exist? If not, then why does it no longer exist? If so, then where could it have gone?

6) Was any missile debris found anywhere near the Shanksville crash site?

7) What, if any, professional qualifications and expertise do you have that make you an authority on what high-speed aircraft impacts should look like?

8) How many cleanup workers and emergency response workers doubt that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville?

9) How many United Airlines employees doubt that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville?

10) Can you post a picture of an airplane crash that demonstrates what you think the crater should look like?

11) Did anyone at the Moussaoui trial complain about a lack of evidence that Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville?


These will be reposted in every Flight 93 thread you post in until satisfactory answers are given.
Click to expand...

RedIbis, why do you even post here if you're just going to ignore everything everyone else says?

You may as well be talking to yourself.
 
1337m4n said:
RedIbis, why do you even post here if you're just going to ignore everything everyone else says?

You may as well be talking to yourself.
Click to expand...

I always answer questions when they are logical and asked in a civil and friendly manner. That's not much to ask. Yours, on the whole, are stupid, and badgering me is not going to get me to engage in discussion.
 
I think the bigger issue is you don't explain what your position is very thoroughly. You "imply" and you "suggest." You raise "objections" but you don't explain them beyond providing just enough content to show that you think the "Official Story" is a crock. I have to "guess" that you believe in the mainstream truth movement arguments, but I kind of hate assuming. Some of the badgering you get may be "unfair" in that you get flooded with responses but I think the basic reasons for them coming around are obvious; you are never clear. This lack of clarity means you'll willingly overlook any underlying flaws in your suggestions no matter how mundane they wind up being.
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
This lack of clarity means you'll willingly overlook any underlying flaws in your suggestions no matter how mundane they wind up being.
Click to expand...

And, I hate to say this, it almost appears as if Red is purposfully being not clear simply to avoid having to answer questions about those underlying flaws.
 
RedIbis said:
I always answer questions when they are logical and asked in a civil and friendly manner. That's not much to ask. Yours, on the whole, are stupid, and badgering me is not going to get me to engage in discussion.
Click to expand...
Here is a simple and straight-forward question for you. Can you think of any other way that the crater could have been created other than by ramming an airplane-sized and airplane-shaped object into the ground so that more than half of it would be buried?
 
A polite simple question.

What do you think happened to the aircraft, passengers and crew if the plane didn't crash at SHanksville?

If it was shot down please tell me what you think actualy shot it down?
 
RedIbis said:
I always answer questions when they are logical and asked in a civil and friendly manner. That's not much to ask. Yours, on the whole, are stupid, and badgering me is not going to get me to engage in discussion.
Click to expand...

Copy and paste from another thread? In other words, you aren't going to answer questions in this thread or any other for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
A polite simple question.

What do you think happened to the aircraft, passengers and crew if the plane didn't crash at SHanksville?

If it was shot down please tell me what you think actualy shot it down?
Click to expand...

Don't know.
 
leftysergeant said:
Here is a simple and straight-forward question for you. Can you think of any other way that the crater could have been created other than by ramming an airplane-sized and airplane-shaped object into the ground so that more than half of it would be buried?
Click to expand...

This is not a simple and straighforward question. In fact, the whole last part is baseless. You would have to prove that half of Flight 93 was even buried in the crater.

In other words, there is no photographic or video record of nearly 50 tons being excavated from the crater. None. The closest a photograph comes is the engine part curiously poised in the backhoe bucket, released five years after the fact.

If you think that one part constitutes half the plane, or you're not the least bit suspicious why such a record of the excavation does not exist, there is simply nothing I can say which will spark even the slightest skepticism in you.
 
RedIbis said:
This is not a simple and straighforward question. In fact, the whole last part is baseless. You would have to prove that half of Flight 93 was even buried in the crater.

In other words, there is no photographic or video record of nearly 50 tons being excavated from the crater. None. The closest a photograph comes is the engine part curiously poised in the backhoe bucket, released five years after the fact.

If you think that one part constitutes half the plane, or you're not the least bit suspicious why such a record of the excavation does not exist, there is simply nothing I can say which will spark even the slightest skepticism in you.
Click to expand...

If you posted some kind of proof that something else happened, like the plane parked in a hanger or something along that line, you might. Instead, it's a constant stream of stuff that only amount to "I don't understand, so it couldn't have happened that way." You demand proof from us, yet provide no alternative other than "I think this looks funny". Sorry, I'll believe that the plane crashed exactly as stated until you show some other alternative. To do otherwise is stupid, and is a perversion of skepticism.
You can admit it. The one and only reason you so doggedly hang on to this delusion is not because of any evidence, but because you are emotionally invested in distrusting the "government". But go on and keep believing. It's all you've got.
 
RedIbis said:
This is not a simple and straighforward question. In fact, the whole last part is baseless. You would have to prove that half of Flight 93 was even buried in the crater.
Click to expand...

That answer is non-responsive. I asked you by what other mechanism the crater could have been made.
 
RedIbis said:
This is not a simple and straighforward question. In fact, the whole last part is baseless. You would have to prove that half of Flight 93 was even buried in the crater.

In other words, there is no photographic or video record of nearly 50 tons being excavated from the crater. None. The closest a photograph comes is the engine part curiously poised in the backhoe bucket, released five years after the fact.

If you think that one part constitutes half the plane, or you're not the least bit suspicious why such a record of the excavation does not exist, there is simply nothing I can say which will spark even the slightest skepticism in you.
Click to expand...

Flight 93 caused the impact crater, part was buried, part was ejected. You have no claims save the moronic statements you make. Do you have a point, you have nothing but failed statements, tangential at best to the no plane nonsense, and idiotic shoot down claims. You have made no viable claims. Why, is it due to ignorance of crash dynamics and obsession with Gravy?

The crater is due to 93's impact and backed up by impact attitude, velocity vector, and speed; located exactly where the RADAR track ends. Based on RADAR and FDR, your weak no claim statements are nonsense.

Based on all you posts, you don't know anything about flight 93 useful for this thread.

"How is a Shanksville No Planer any less crazy than a WTC no-planer?" All the claims by 911 truth are crazy, all faction in 911 truth make crazy moronic claims to keep on track for perpetual failure, the only goal of 911 truth.
 
Titanic Explorer said:
EVERY SINGLE Truther I have encountered was a 'No planer'. Most of them doubt a plane crashed in Shanksville, and scores of them doubt a plane hit the Pentagon. Some of them (but I suspect a small percentage) think no planes hit the WTC. This is the odd thing- I've heard Truthers denounce WTC no planers as being idiots on a disinformation campaign, yet turn around and claim no plane crashed in Shanksville. How is a Shanksville No Planer any less crazy than a WTC no-planer? Alex Jones has denounced WTC no planers- Yet I think he is a 'No planer' when it comes to the Shanksville crash site. It find it comical that the 'No planers' are arguing amongst themslves-insisting their no plane delusion is sound, but the other no planers must be crazy.
Click to expand...

Good point. Personally I believe no planes at all were used in the 911 attacks. See for example: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186212

Where are the four jet engines from the two airliners (flight 11 and 175 if I remember correctly) that allegedly crashed into the WTC towers? Did three of the jet engines evaporate into thin air (like all the black boxes)? I don't think so. And the one jet engine that was found some blocks away from ground zero looks suspiciously planted (for example too small engine and of wrong type some people say).
 
Occam's razor. Find the best explanation for one and try and replicate it across the other two buildings.

Shanksville might be a bit different as that looks like a screw-up by being delayed on the tarmac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom