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

TjW said:
What "official" would you accept a statement from? List either names or job titles.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for a reply from the FBI. That would be official enough (if I can see that the e-mail really is from the FBI and not some spoof).
 
I'm still recovering from the hip I broke laughing at the very notion that Anders would accept an "official statement" from the very people he suspects are behind the attacks, while totally ignoring a multitude of objective witness accounts.

You are a funny funny man Anders
 
twinstead said:
I'm still recovering from the hip I broke laughing at the very notion that Anders would accept an "official statement" from the very people he suspects are behind the attacks, while totally ignoring a multitude of objective witness accounts.

You are a funny funny man Anders
Click to expand...

The FBI was not behind the attack according to my theory. I believe it was some form of shadow group not connected to any particular agency, company or even country.
 
And what answer could you receive that would cause you to say "Oh, well, I guess I was wrong -- at least about the jet engine"?
Bearing in mind that airliners are not usually certified with only a single type of jet engine.
The various airlines have different preferences, often based on what their maintenance personnel are familiar with.
 
TjW said:
And what answer could you receive that would cause you to say "Oh, well, I guess I was wrong -- at least about the jet engine"?
Bearing in mind that airliners are not usually certified with only a single type of jet engine.
The various airlines have different preferences, often based on what their maintenance personnel are familiar with.
Click to expand...

If the official version says that it is a jet engine that fits the 767 that crashed, then I was very probably wrong about the engine being of wrong type.
 
Here I found a strange comment:

"By no means finally, but just as disturbing, the core of a jet engine, which can been seen in several 9/11 videos falling out of the northern face of the WTC's South Tower, and which hit a building on its way down, and was photographed and videoed-in the presence of FBI personnel and at least one FBI vehicle-where it came to rest at the junction of Church and Murray streets, was later photographed, prior to its burial in a land fill on Staten Island. So much for what murder investigators are usually so concerned about: The chain of custody and preservation of important evidence, pending its identification."

From: http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/03/19/a-little-known-fact-about-the-911-planes/

The strange part is the text I have highlighted: "burial in a land fill on Staten Island". Is the info in the article correct? Did they bury the jet engine in a landfill?! :confused:
 
Anders Lindman said:
If the official version says that it is a jet engine that fits the 767 that crashed, then I was very probably wrong about the engine being of wrong type.
Click to expand...

No, no you won't. I, along with everyone else, knows that engine part came from a jet that crashed in NYC, can locate pictures of part and diagrams of the engine assembly, as can you. You're waiting for the second somebody posts that picture and or diagram so you can shift the goalposts and demand a serial number.

It's an old game, one that's been beaten to death on this forum. You'll need to better than this.
 
AJM8125 said:
No, no you won't. I, along with everyone else, knows that engine part came from a jet that crashed in NYC, can locate pictures of part and diagrams of the engine assembly, as can you. You're waiting for the second somebody posts that picture and or diagram so you can shift the goalposts and demand a serial number.

It's an old game, one that's been beaten to death on this forum. You'll need to better than this.
Click to expand...

I often see conspiracy info as entertainment, but not as a game. If I shift a goalpost it's because I think it's needed, not for some personal game but to bring more clarity.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I often see conspiracy info as entertainment, but not as a game. If I shift a goalpost it's because I think it's needed, not for some personal game but to bring more clarity.
Click to expand...

Of course you do. It's the only way for keep a thread going. Handwave away the facts that contradict your arguments then move the goalposts when cornered. That's just typical tactics used in the no plane argument, used in an attempt to defend an absolutely ridiculous position.
 
AJM8125 said:
Of course you do. It's the only way for keep a thread going. Handwave away the facts that contradict your arguments then move the goalposts when cornered. That's just typical tactics used in the no plane argument, used in an attempt to defend an absolutely ridiculous position.
Click to expand...

Well, if one wants to defend an absolutely ridiculous position, I guess thats the way to do it.
 
Last edited:
AJM8125 said:
Of course you do. It's the only way for keep a thread going. Handwave away the facts that contradict your arguments then move the goalposts when cornered. That's just typical tactics used in the no plane argument, used in an attempt to defend an absolutely ridiculous position.
Click to expand...

I actually admit if I have been mistaken. But then I want really convincing info.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I actually admit if I have been mistaken. But then I want really convincing info.
Click to expand...

Entirely hypothetical. Since facts do not impress you in the slightest, nor any other evidence, you cannot be convinced by them. Ergo, you will not admit a mistake nor alter your beliefs.

You're trapped in your own game. Again, I do not envy you in the slightest.
 
alienentity said:
Entirely hypothetical. Since facts do not impress you in the slightest, nor any other evidence, you cannot be convinced by them. Ergo, you will not admit a mistake nor alter your beliefs.

You're trapped in your own game. Again, I do not envy you in the slightest.
Click to expand...

But I haven't seen any convincing fact telling me what kind of jet engine was found near Ground Zero.

As for hypothetical, let's assume that Barack Obama would announce: "No planes were used in the attacks on 9/11." What would happen? It's almost a decade ago the attacks happened. How would the American people react to such an announcement today?
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
But I haven't seen any convincing fact telling me what kind of jet engine was found near Ground Zero.

As for hypothetical, let's assume that Barack Obama would announce: "No planes were used in the attacks on 9/11." What would happen? It's almost a decade ago the attacks happened. How would the American people react to such an announcement today?
Click to expand...
He would likely be examined for mental illness. What's your excuse?
 
Gravy I sadly suspect Ander's definition of "convincing info" is different than everybody else.
 
twinstead said:
Gravy I sadly suspect Ander's definition of "convincing info" is different than everybody else.
Click to expand...
Of course. I normally don't deal with no-planers at all, but sometimes it's tempting to point out that they're deliberately not seeing the forest or the trees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom