Breaking news! Truther Ignored by Senator!

[Craig4]

If they're planning on living in the US and learning to fly there, then yes they are undertrained if they can't speak English. These guys sent up all types of red flags at their flight schools.
"As the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported, “Moussaoui raised suspicions at the Pan Am International Flight Academy in Egan [Minnesota]” when he attended the Academy in August 2001 to learn how to fly jumbo jets. He “first raised eyebrows when, during a simple introductory exchange, he said he was from France, but then didn’t seem to understand when the instructor spoke French to him… Moussaoui then became belligerent and evasive about his background… In addition, he seemed inept in basic flying procedures, while seeking expensive training on an advanced commercial jet simulator.”
Nonsense.
I don't think they flew those planes at all. I don't see Hani Hanjour performing the spiral dive and crashing into the Pentagon the way he did. He was noted as a "terrible pilot" and "incompetent" (among other things) by his flight instructors. I also don't see any pilot flying a 767 545 mph at sea level into a relatively small lateral target.
And how do you go from speaking about the pilots right into how bombs were planted? You need to learn how to transition.

And yet we have conclusive evidence that their training was adequate in that we have videos of them flying the planes into buildings.

 

[Unsecured Coins]

I hope you have fun in court trying to prove a case with no evidence.

 

[triforcharity]

So if I don't have explosive residue that equates to there not being evidence of a conspiracy? Do you type that stuff thinking that I'll buy it or do you type it for your fellow dupes on this forum?

No, he asked for any evidence whatsoever. He ALSO asked for your explosive residue evidence.

Got any?

 

[kerikiwi]

Meaning they had to do more than "simply steer". First off, steering wasn't all that easy. Secondly, navigation was involved. We're told this inexperienced pilots flew 175 at 545 mph into the North Tower. That's ridiculous. That's an outrageous speed at sea level.

Steering was 'that easy' because all but one plane were steered right to their targets. Navigation was obviously involved since they managed to steer all but one plane to the targets.
All 4 inexperienced pilots flew planes and all but one hit their targets. (This is getting repetitive, isn't it?) It is far from ridiculous. It actually happened.
And what does the claim that 545mph is an outrageous speed at sea level actually mean? That it was too fast, so the pilots couldn't have been flying?
That they really should have been going slower?
Are you claiming that some other people, experienced pilots, were actually flying the planes?

 

[twinstead]

Are you claiming that some other people, experienced pilots, were actually flying the planes?

For all that is holy if this leads to yet ANOTHER "remote control" thread I shall indeed scream

 

[tempesta29]

So, the debris field for 7WTC was small, so it had to be a CD. But the debris field for 1&2WTC was big, so it had to be a CD.

Love your logic there. Keep going! This is funny!!

They're quite different aren't they, the Twin Towers and WTC 7? Still, the debris from the Twin Towers doesn't lean one particular direction. It spreads outward rather equilaterally.

Im sorry, does that mean it doesn't exist? WTC6 isn't in there either, does that mean 6 didn't exist?

Straw man. It means the kink isn't as significant as some photos lead us to believe. And what exactly does the kink do to support your case? I lost track of that (from the moment it was uttered).

 

[Thunder]

So if I don't have explosive residue that equates to there not being evidence of a conspiracy? ?

how else do you plan on proving the twin towers were taken down via controlled demolition, then without physical evidence of explosives??????

Do you type that stuff thinking that I'll buy it or do you type it for your fellow dupes on this forum?

referring to those who oppose your views, as "dupes", suggests you have nothing else to say and your argument is valueless.

 

[kerikiwi]

I don't have specific ideas about how it was organized. I'm not trained in organizing such plans. I also don't know how military strategy works either, but it certainly doesn't mean I think the Gulf of Tonkin incident was real.

With all due respect (think about that) your little avoidance and silly analogy is pathetic.
Anybody who gave a modicum of consideration to the realities of how something like that could be achieved would see in a nanosecond how ludicrous the idea is.
But to help you along I suggest you read Debunking 9/11 myths: why conspiracy theories can't stand up to the facts, edited by David Dunbar and Brad Reagan.

 

[twinstead]

Forget this forum; it appears that according to tempesta, pretty much the entire world's engineering and scientific communities are "dupes".

 

[Unsecured Coins]

I'm just really interested in finding out how much force it requires to get one's index finger up the second knuckle into one's ear canal

 

[tempesta29]

And yet we have conclusive evidence that their training was adequate in that we have videos of them flying the planes into buildings.

You have videos of them flying these planes? Oooooh. Do share! Sharing is fun!

 

[DGM]

You have videos of them flying these planes? Oooooh. Do share! Sharing is fun!

You have videos of the perps planting (insert your flavor) explosives? Do share.

This is fun!

 

[twinstead]

You have videos of them flying these planes? Oooooh. Do share! Sharing is fun!

So you can muse all you want about exotic explosives and nano thermate and about rigging 3 huge buildings undetected for demolitions, but you require US to provide you videos of the hijackers flying the planes?

What is wrong with you?

 

[tempesta29]

With all due respect (think about that) your little avoidance and silly analogy is pathetic.
Anybody who gave a modicum of consideration to the realities of how something like that could be achieved would see in a nanosecond how ludicrous the idea is.
But to help you along I suggest you read Debunking 9/11 myths: why conspiracy theories can't stand up to the facts, edited by David Dunbar and Brad Reagan.

You want me to speculate. Why? I'm fine with discussing the collapses. I just want to know how the crash zones offered the upper sections equal resistance as the undamaged structure did. I want to know how so many core columns can offer zero resistance in the case of WTC 7. That's what I want to know.

 

[Thunder]

I want to know how so many core columns can offer zero resistance in the case of WTC 7. That's what I want to know.

what do you care what us "dupes" have to say?

 

[kerikiwi]

You have videos of them flying these planes? Oooooh. Do share! Sharing is fun!

Well, you can't give any ideas about how the bombs in the basement thing was pulled off. How about an idea of who flew the planes? And how they were persuaded to do it?

 

[kerikiwi]

You want me to speculate. Why? I'm fine with discussing the collapses. I just want to know how the crash zones offered the upper sections equal resistance as the undamaged structure did. I want to know how so many core columns can offer zero resistance in the case of WTC 7. That's what I want to know.

Read the book I referred you to.
It is all explained.

 

[tempesta29]

You have videos of the perps planting (insert your flavor) explosives? Do share.

This is fun!

So you can muse all you want about exotic explosives and nano thermate and about rigging 3 huge buildings undetected for demolitions, but you require US to provide you videos of the hijackers flying the planes?

What is wrong with you?

I never claimed to have direct evidence that someone planted explosives. Someone just said they have images of these hijackers flying the planes. So... why not share them exactly?

 

[A W Smith]

Pardon me. I was referring to Frank DeMartini, the construction manager of the towers.

Demartini was not the engineer of record.

So the gravity of the upper section was enough to propel all of that debris laterally like it did? Did you see how large some of the steel girder sections were that were blown outward? The debris field doesn't really help your case.

Funny that the "Fell in its own footprint" truther argument only applies to building seven. Remember how I told you that you were not unique? Thanks for proving my point. You think debris falling 540 feet away from a structure a quarter mile high is a problem? Math and geometry prove otherwise.

Meaning they had to do more than "simply steer". First off, steering wasn't all that easy. Secondly, navigation was involved. We're told this inexperienced pilots flew 175 at 545 mph into the North Tower. That's ridiculous. That's an outrageous speed at sea level.

Pilots and even the flight school trainers of the hijackers think otherwise, Didn't you see my quotes from those pilots and trainers in this very thread a few posts back? Sorry, I forgot truthers are too busy being ignorant.

I don't have specific ideas about how it was organized. I'm not trained in organizing such plans. I also don't know how military strategy works either, but it certainly doesn't mean I think the Gulf of Tonkin incident was real.

The fact that you are not a scholar in any field relevant to the events of 911 is self evident.

The kink isn't visible in the video I posted. Plus, a kink in the middle is a good way to limit the debris field. The Verizon building and Post Office were virtually unscathed as a result.

do you see the fallacy you are commiting?

 

[DGM]

Read the book I referred you to.
It is all explained.

What? No YouTube video.

I've been trying to get NIST to make a video but, I doubt anyone will sit through 2000 hours (*) of it.


* just a guess how long it would be based on nothing more then my opinion *