911 Facts Consolidated

Status
Not open for further replies.
MileHighMadness said:
Goes to show you, even highly educated people can be conned into believing stupid crap.
Click to expand...

I remember reading about a disorder where to all public appearances, the person functions normally and competently. Inside, a boiling mess of psychosis.
Also, not a clinical disorder, everyone is composed of a combination of subjective preferences (I like chocolate ice cream best, doctors and nurses that smoke), and subjective and objective beliefs.
For some, subjective beliefs (my god will heal me, fundamentalist biologists, the US went to war to steal the natural resources of Iraq and Afghanistan, reptilian overlords) trump objective (math, science, logic) evidence because it pleases them before all else.

A couple of years ago I met a noted biochemist at Borders. Checked him out later. We talked for about an hour, very interesting,smart guy.
As we were walking to our cars, he said " Did you know that man didn't walk on the moon? The flag was waving even though there's no air on the moon, and the shadows ....."
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
Many of the facts are here.

http://www.911hardfacts.com/
Click to expand...


Interesting set of facts many of which have also been posted on this forum with no rebuttal of any kind.

But what this author leaves out is the set of fact surrounding the deliberate blocking by the CIA and FBI HQ of the FBI criminal investigation on Mihdhar and Hazmi that FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team wanted to undertake.

This information on this has already been posted on this forum in great detail many times. It was this action that resulted in allowing the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11. To leave this out makes this web site very weak in terms of what information it does present.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
paloalto said:
http://www.911hardfacts.com/

Interesting set of facts many of which have also been posted on this forum with no rebuttal of any kind.

But what this author leaves out is the set of fact surrounding the deliberate blocking by the CIA and FBI HQ of the FBI criminal investigation on Mihdhar and Hazmi that FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team wanted to undertake.

This information on this has already been posted on this forum in great detail many times. It was this action that resulted in allowing the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11. To leave this out makes this web site very weak in terms of what information it does present.
Click to expand...
Are you saying Mihdahar and Hazmi were not known by the FBI before 911?

There are not hard facts at the web site. If you say there are then your failed logic with your standard SPAM program is only the tip of the iceberg.

In FACT! All of the junk at http://www.911hardfacts.com/ becomes debunked by your line of reasoning. Period.
http://www.911hardfacts.com/ is total nonsense because you debunked it by talking about the 19 terrorists who did 911.

So you lied or have no clue what you are doing if you say this.
paloalto said:
http://www.911hardfacts.com/

Interesting set of facts many of which have also been posted on this forum with no rebuttal of any kind. ...
Click to expand...
Wrong, your work is a rebuttal of the lies and delusions at 911hardfacts.

You need to work on your logic.

All the claims at 911 facts are debunked. If you say otherwise, please pick one of the many lies and present your side. YOU can't do it.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
Are you saying Mihdhar and Hazmi were not known by the FBI before 911?

There are not hard facts at the web site. If you say there are then your failed logic with your standard SPAM program is only the tip of the iceberg.

In FACT! All of the junk at http://www.911hardfacts.com/ becomes debunked by your line of reasoning. Period.
http://www.911hardfacts.com/ is total nonsense because you debunked it by talking about the 19 terrorists who did 911.

So you lied or have no clue what you are doing if you say this.

Wrong, your work is a rebuttal of the lies and delusions at 911hardfacts.

You need to work on your logic.

All the claims at 911 facts are debunked. If you say otherwise, please pick one of the many lies and present your side. YOU can't do it.
Click to expand...

I was only taking about the facts surrounding Moussaoui, Mihdhar and Hazmi.

The failure by agents and managers FBI HQ to allow a FISA search warrant for Moussaoui’s duffle bag has never been adequately explained.

And while the CIA and FBI HQ knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting in January 2000 with Walid bin Attash, mastermind of the Cole bombing, actually planning the Cole bombing, this information was kept secret from FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team until after 9/11 to prevent them from having the evidence they needed in order to start any criminal investigation for these two al Qaeda terrorists.

I did not bother to look at any of the other information on this site, since any theory that these buildings did not collapse due the contact with the hijacked flights on 9/11 is my opinion is just complete BS.
 
paloalto said:
...
I did not bother to look at any of the other information on this site, since any theory that these buildings did not collapse due the contact with the hijacked flights on 9/11 is my opinion is just complete BS.
Click to expand...

You made a mistake. That entire web site is BS. Oops, the web site did not get your tripe right. The hardfacts web site is filled with delusional opinions, like your crazy conclusions.

The idiotic web site debunks itself.

http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_07.htm While these intelligence failures suggest at least the reasonable possibility of U.S. government complicity in 9/11, there is a mountain of physical evidence that directly implicates high-level government knowledge and participation in the planning and execution of September 11.
Click to expand...
Hogwash made up by an idiot.
 
Intentional derail?

paloalto starts iff quoting the OP and making a claim about it:

paloalto said:
Clayton Moore said:
Many of the facts are here.

http://www.911hardfacts.com/
Click to expand...


Interesting set of facts many of which have also been posted on this forum with no rebuttal of any kind.
Click to expand...
but then fails to support this claim about the subject matter with evidence or arguments.

Instead he branches off to things that are specifically NOT included in the OP:

paloalto said:
But what this author leaves out is the set of fact surrounding the deliberate blocking by the CIA and FBI HQ of the FBI criminal investigation on Mihdhar and Hazmi that FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team wanted to undertake.

This information on this has already been posted on this forum in great detail many times. It was this action that resulted in allowing the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11. To leave this out makes this web site very weak in terms of what information it does present.
Click to expand...




Anyway, paloalto, could you please complete the claim you made first by poibting us to specific "facts" contained in the website that the OP links to, and explain how these "have also been posted on this forum with no rebuttal of any kind"? This seens to contrast with what you wrote later on:
paloalto said:
I did not bother to look at any of the other information on this site, since any theory that these buildings did not collapse due the contact with the hijacked flights on 9/11 is my opinion is just complete BS.
Click to expand...



Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Oystein said:
Intentional derail?

paloalto starts iff quoting the OP and making a claim about it:


but then fails to support this claim about the subject matter with evidence or arguments.

Instead he branches off to things that are specifically NOT included in the OP:






Anyway, paloalto, could you please complete the claim you made first by poibting us to specific "facts" contained in the website that the OP links to, and explain how these "have also been posted on this forum with no rebuttal of any kind"? This seens to contrast with what you wrote later on:




Thanks.
Click to expand...

I was refering to the infornmation on the Moussaoui investigation. I have posted the same material several times on this forum. This information is backed up in the DOJ IG report.

But I agree that the rest of the material on this web site is pure crap.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Many of the facts are here.

http://www.911hardfacts.com/








Even so they still use "complete collapse" when they should use "almost complete destruction."

Collapse means fall down.
Click to expand...

Collapse means gravity is real; Down is the directional force of gravity's effect. There's nothing new here to dispute physics. :rolleyes: The hard facts site is a no facts site.
 
Last edited:
paloalto said:
I was refering to the infornmation on the Moussaoui investigation. I have posted the same material several times on this forum. This information is backed up in the DOJ IG report.

But I agree that the rest of the material on this web site is pure crap.
Click to expand...

Hmm I still don't know which facts these are and am not going to search for them on such vague terms in the "911hardfacts" site.

But ok, thanks.
 
paloalto said:
I was refering to the infornmation on the Moussaoui investigation. I have posted the same material several times on this forum. This information is backed up in the DOJ IG report.

But I agree that the rest of the material on this web site is pure crap.
Click to expand...

Well correct me if I am wrong but your take on 9/11 is that it was allowed to happen as advertised(hijacked planes were crashed into buildings which suffered damage directly or indirectly as a result of those crashes) whereas the hardfacts site Clayton linked to, and Clayton himself adhere to a quite different scenario in which a vastly complicated and massive logistal mechanism was put into place to only make it look like hijacked planes were crashed into buildings which suffered damage directly or indirectly as a result of those crashes.
 
jaydeehess said:
Does a 2008 date explain why the author seemingly has no knowledge that NIST was investigating WTC 7?
Click to expand...


Maybe. The domain name was registered in March 2007. However, NIST had been working on the WTC7 report since 2005, so I think ignorance and lack of research on the site owner's part are the primary culprits.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
Well correct me if I am wrong but your take on 9/11 is that it was allowed to happen as advertised(hijacked planes were crashed into buildings which suffered damage directly or indirectly as a result of those crashes) whereas the hardfacts site Clayton linked to, and Clayton himself adhere to a quite different scenario in which a vastly complicated and massive logistal mechanism was put into place to only make it look like hijacked planes were crashed into buildings which suffered damage directly or indirectly as a result of those crashes.
Click to expand...

Yes I think you have this about right.
 
well its hardly surprising that a supposed comprehensive listing of facts that displays ignorance of the very basic fact that NIST was at the time of authorship , commissioned to investigate the collapse of WTC7 , and which proposes a conspiracy to demolish the WTC actively, does not mention a different conspiracy altogether. To include LIHOP such as paloalto proposes as well as a distinctly MIHOP would be to have proposed two mutually exclusive conspiracies at the same time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom