Muslim researcher explains how 9/11 was made

Originally Posted by mehmetin
By reverse, you ignored especially these arguments :
1- The planes were controlled by one central team using high-tech.
2- The plane that hit the Pentagon was not a B757.
3- The twin towers were demolished by explosives.


LIAR.
Especially these arguments have been addressed by pretty much everyone here. Everybody has pointed out that you
1- Provided no material evidence for central control by one team and deny all the evidence that points to all planes controlled by a team of hijackers (4 teams total, acting independently after boarding)
2- Provided no material evidence for any other proposition, but deny the massive amounts of evidence for a 757
#3- Provided no material evidence for the use of any eplosives at the twin towers, much less their demolition, and deny the many indepent scientific studies that show how the massive fires can indeed easily lead to collapse

You are the LIAR.

1- The material evidence for the central command is the succession of the hijacks and this is consistent with all other facts. You just ignore it.
2- The measured wingspan on basis of the damagespan is smaller than a 757. This is a material evidence. You just ignore it.
3- The dust ejections, de collapse speed, the damages on all steel parts, the distance between ejection waves, ... EVERYTHING is consistent with demolition by explosives. You just ignore all.
 
You don't actually have to find 19 people willing to commit suicide either - only the pilots need know the ultimate aim of the hijack.

This is an easy flawing argument! Do you really believe all other 15 people will continue to collaborate when hey will understand that they are going to die?

In fact, all official arguments are flawed ones like that. The official story is huge lie.
 
I wonder how many Muslims deny the truth of Jihad and suicide bombings by people who have hijacked their religion. You'd think it would be a hard thing to miss.

Recently, when I joked with a Muslim telling him "9/11 was made by Alqaeda", he was angry and went out. He considered me a traitor!

Most of Muslims believe 9/11 is made by USA, this is their feeling. But they do not have strong argument.

Too many Muslims are also aware that killing innocents is not an Islamic way.
 
This is an easy flawing argument! Do you really believe all other 15 people will continue to collaborate when hey will understand that they are going to die?

In fact, all official arguments are flawed ones like that. The official story is huge lie.

At what point will they be aware that they are about to trundle off to paradise? How many would actually have been in the cockpit to see the looming building? How many could have been able to safely land the plane if they disagreed with the pilots plans?
 
Recently, when I joked with a Muslim telling him "9/11 was made by Alqaeda", he was angry and went out. He considered me a traitor!

Most of Muslims believe 9/11 is made by USA, this is their feeling. But they do not have strong argument.

Too many Muslims are also aware that killing innocents is not an Islamic way.

That is very sad. From my observations, there is a general lack of critical thinking in Turkey. Educated people believe too much ******** from spoon bending to the latest conspiracy theory.
 
1- The material evidence for the central command is the succession of the hijacks and this is consistent with all other facts. You just ignore it.

As has been said before, if the events were simultaneous that would be interesting. That they happened one after the other is mundane.
 
You are the LIAR.

I am not, because...

1- The material evidence for the central command is the succession of the hijacks and this is consistent with all other facts. You just ignore it.
I did not ignore it. I addressed it by pointing out that what you consider "evidence" is not proof for your theory at all. Everybody else has told you the same.

2- The measured wingspan on basis of the damagespan is smaller than a 757. This is a material evidence. You just ignore it.
I did not ignore that. I pointed out that ALL the evidence taken together is clear proof of a 757 - that would include the damage to the facade. You claim, without proof and indeed without understanding the basic physics here, that the damage should match the width of the plane. Fact is: The wingtips are the lightest part of the plane, consequently they might not damage the facade visibly, or they did not arrive there after the rest of the plane already disintegrated.

3- The dust ejections, de collapse speed, the damages on all steel parts, the distance between ejection waves, ... EVERYTHING is consistent with demolition by explosives. You just ignore all.
I did not ignore that. Your alleged "evidence" is not in fact proof for your allegations. You don't understand demolition, explosives, the physics of gas, and structural engineering.
 
Most of Muslims believe 9/11 is made by USA, this is their feeling. But they do not have strong argument.

A feeling is all that you have and looking at your introductory slides you seem to acknowledge it as an important element for the basis of your conspiracy idea. The feeling exists because you and your friends are sincere in their belief in a peaceful Islam in submission to an all merciful creator. But Muslims like yourself must recognise that feelings of resentment against the U.S. and Israel have been manipulated through the use of the religion for political ends. The way many Turks practice Islam may be beautiful but you should not be so naive to think that it is the same everywhere.

And your argument? You just launch off from gaps in your own understanding of subjects such as aviation into complete flights of fantasy.
 
Last edited:
=mehmetin;6976851]You are the LIAR.

1- The material evidence for the central command is the succession of the hijacks and this is consistent with all other facts. You just ignore it.

That would be circumstantial evidence at best. There are many much simpler explanations so this is not enough for even a prima faci case.

2- The measured wingspan on basis of the damagespan is smaller than a 757. This is a material evidence. You just ignore it.

really? prove it.

3- The dust ejections, de collapse speed, the damages on all steel parts, the distance between ejection waves, ... EVERYTHING is consistent with demolition by explosives. You just ignore all.

really? prove it. As far as I can see nothing is consistent with demolition by explosives.
 
At what point will they be aware that they are about to trundle off to paradise? How many would actually have been in the cockpit to see the looming building? How many could have been able to safely land the plane if they disagreed with the pilots plans?

They can fight against the suicide pilot and ask to the real pilots to land the planes.

Originally Posted by mehmetin
Recently, when I joked with a Muslim telling him "9/11 was made by Alqaeda", he was angry and went out. He considered me a traitor!

Most of Muslims believe 9/11 is made by USA, this is their feeling. But they do not have strong argument.

Too many Muslims are also aware that killing innocents is not an Islamic way.

That is very sad. From my observations, there is a general lack of critical thinking in Turkey. Educated people believe too much ******** from spoon bending to the latest conspiracy theory.

Do tou mean that you are superior critical thinker? You are not less credulous then average Turkish people, but also average human. For myself, I am not living in Turkey, and I am the source of my work, I did not follow anybody's work.

Even if Turkish people follow the critics of the official story, they are not sure about what they believe, and they remain silent. As many people, they have some opinions, but they remain undecided.

As has been said before, if the events were simultaneous that would be interesting. That they happened one after the other is mundane.

If the events were simultaneous that would prove 4 different teams made the strikes. As they are successive, that proves ONE team made the hijacks. But I can understand your flawed logic: When evidence prove what you believe, you consider them,. When evidence disprove your opinion, you throw them out.

I reckon it might do you good to watch the following documentary on the Air France Flight 8969 plot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNmc7r50ul4

Muslims like yourself who deny the sickness within are obstructing its cure.

I looked that. From the beginning, they lied: "No political demand, no négociations aver hostages". That's wrong! They asked to speak on media. That was their only request. That was refused and they were killed. After that, every claim from officials is meaningless, all claimed intensions are baseless. The only thing we know is they wanted to give a message, that message could have been given from the airport where they landed, but nobody listen them, and they were killed. LIES.

A feeling is all that you have and looking at your introductory slides you seem to acknowledge it as an important element for the basis of your conspiracy idea. The feeling exists because you and your friends are sincere in their belief in a peaceful Islam in submission to an all merciful creator. But Muslims like yourself must recognise that feelings of resentment against the U.S. and Israel have been manipulated through the use of the religion for political ends. The way many Turks practice Islam may be beautiful but you should not be so naive to think that it is the same everywhere.

And your argument? You just launch off from gaps in your own understanding of subjects such as aviation into complete flights of fantasy.

Keep your personal comments for yoruself and explain us "HOW and WHY 4 different teams succeeded to make 4 succesive hijacks?" Your official story, the story of the biggest and most technologic country, is simply stopped with small evidence! I know, you'll not see that, you'll DENY.

What are you doing in Turkey? Are you Turkish? Or are you spying Turks?
 
Quote:
=mehmetin;6976851]You are the LIAR.

1- The material evidence for the central command is the succession of the hijacks and this is consistent with all other facts. You just ignore it.

That would be circumstantial evidence at best. There are many much simpler explanations so this is not enough for even a prima faci case.

See slides 8 to 20 of my power point at www.peace911.org. US government should still explain us "HOW and WHY 4 different teams succeeded to make 4 succesive hijacks?" The question was asked on september 2006 to the President G.W. BUSH by an official letter that he just denied. Yes USA administration is unable to answer that question.

Quote:
2- The measured wingspan on basis of the damagespan is smaller than a 757. This is a material evidence. You just ignore it.

really? prove it.

See slides 21 to 32 of my power point at www.peace911.org .

Quote:
3- The dust ejections, de collapse speed, the damages on all steel parts, the distance between ejection waves, ... EVERYTHING is consistent with demolition by explosives. You just ignore all.

really? prove it. As far as I can see nothing is consistent with demolition by explosives.

See slide 33 to 54.1 of my power point at www.peace911.org .
 
The real pilots were murdered by Islamic terrorists who can't think for themselves; like 911 truth.

They can get help from the control tower. ... There hundreds of other possibilities. NO ONE happened! Why?

The official story is flawed. The criminals of 9/11/2001 are Bush administration and Mossad.
 
See slides 8 to 20 of my power point at www.peace911.org. US government should still explain us "HOW and WHY 4 different teams succeeded to make 4 succesive hijacks?" The question was asked on september 2006 to the President G.W. BUSH by an official letter that he just denied. Yes USA administration is unable to answer that question.

This show how dis-honest you are. You sent a letter to the President and the fact you did not get a reply means:

"The question was asked on September 2006 to the President G.W. BUSH by an official letter that he just denied"


"Yes USA administration is unable to answer that question"


Tell us again why we should listen to you?


:o
 
They can get help from the control tower. ... There hundreds of other possibilities. NO ONE happened! Why?

The official story is flawed. The criminals of 9/11/2001 are Bush administration and Mossad.
19 Islamic terrorist who can't think for themselves did 911. Islamic moron thugs cut the pilot's throats. Murdering dolts, too challenged to think for themselves. There is no control tower in the cockpit to help, you are being silly spewing lies because you hate America and Jews.
 
They can get help from the control tower. ... There hundreds of other possibilities. NO ONE happened! Why?

The official story is flawed. The criminals of 9/11/2001 are Bush administration and Mossad.

It would appear that you are in denial of what happened on 911...

19 mad muslims hijacked 4 aircraft and flew 3 into structures. The 4th was crashed when the brave passengers attempted to take it back.

And this nonsense about 'getting help' from the control tower.. shows just how removed from reality you have gotten.
 
See slides 8 to 20 of my power point at www.peace911.org. US government should still explain us "HOW and WHY 4 different teams succeeded to make 4 succesive hijacks?" The question was asked on september 2006 to the President G.W. BUSH by an official letter that he just denied. Yes USA administration is unable to answer that question.



See slides 21 to 32 of my power point at www.peace911.org .



See slide 33 to 54.1 of my power point at www.peace911.org .


Post them here....I'm not helping you with hits to your site. If you believe they are true, post them here.
 
They can get help from the control tower. ... There hundreds of other possibilities. NO ONE happened! Why?


No one happened???/ what do you mean. On the one plane where the passengers found out what was intended, they did try to take back the plane and apparently overpowered all but the two terrorists in the cockpit. When it became clear they would not manage to keep them out they decided to end it and roll the plane over onto its back in a near vertical dive into the ground.

Could the passenger have succeeded in landing safely?, probably not, even with assistance from the control towers unless at least one of them was a pilot or ex pilot. But its a moot point because they never had the chance to do so.
 

Back
Top Bottom