HI and Interpol.

[Homeland Insurgency]

So if you don't have an inability to answer questions, then why aren't you answering them?

What haven't I answered? Got a question?

Oh, and picking on somebody's spelling skills is rather pathetic you know.

Yes if that's all they did and all I did.

 

[uruk]

No.

Anything else you need to know? How about how to spell inability? You're welcome.

And what does spelling have to do with the OP? Perhaps more evasion and avoidance?
More opportunity to cast aspersions rather than facts or real answers?

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

And what does spelling have to do with the OP? Perhaps more evasion and avoidance?
More opportunity to cast aspersions rather than facts or real answers?

A real answer to what? You're not afraid to ask are you?

 

[doobiedoright]

They don't? So why are they asserting what I claim? Oh yeah... they're debunkers.

Never mind.

Surrender noted!

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

Surrender noted!

You should have highlighted that in white. I mean if you're going to surrender and all.

Unless you have something to ask. Don't run away. It looks so cowardly.

I promise I'll be gentle.

 

[johnny karate]

Why have they not aligned themselves with me and what?

Allow me to rephrase the question to help you with your confusion.

Interpol and other foreign intelligence agencies at the very least have the same access to evidence that Truthers proclaiming "Inside job!" and "We need a new investigation!" do.

So why have none of them aligned themselves with the Truth Movement?

 

[Wildy]

What haven't I answered? Got a question?

Well I don't have a question at the moment. Maybe you should start answering the OP and the other questions in this thread before you are buried in questions.

 

[uruk]

A real answer to what? You're not afraid to ask are you?

Well, you seem very afraid to answer anything. At all.

 

[uruk]

You should have highlighted that in white. I mean if you're going to surrender and all.

Unless you have something to ask. Don't run away. It looks so cowardly.

I promise I'll be gentle.

Wow. The sixth grade called. They want thier schoolyard debate tatics back.

Man up buddy. I don't think you are giving the impression of yourself that you think you are.

 

[TjW]

What evidence did the international community have access to exactly?

Well, presumably the intelligence agencies have internet access. So they certainly had access to at least the same information that led twoofers to conclude that 9/11 was done by the U.S. government.

Yet even countries unfriendly to the U.S., or who could gain politically from embarrassing the Bush administration, did not reach that conclusion.

Do foreign intelligence agencies have less access to qualified experts, or a smaller budget, than the twoof movement?

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

Well, presumably the intelligence agencies have internet access. So they certainly had access to at least the same information that led twoofers to conclude that 9/11 was done by the U.S. government.

Yet even countries unfriendly to the U.S., or who could gain politically from embarrassing the Bush administration, did not reach that conclusion.

Do foreign intelligence agencies have less access to qualified experts, or a smaller budget, than the twoof movement?

sigh...

One more time... what's my conclusion?

And if anyone you claim there internationally or otherwise came to a conclusion then on what evidence was it based? The internet? Or don't you need to know before you come to your conclusions?

 

[johnny karate]

And if anyone you claim there internationally or otherwise came to a conclusion then on what evidence was it based? The internet? Or don't you need to know before you come to your conclusions?

One more time indeed. You keep asking this question even though it's been answered. Several times.

Interpol and foreign intelligence agencies have access to and could use the exact same evidence and information as those in the Truth Movement who are already proclaiming an inside job and demanding a new investigation. And yet they haven't.

Your constant refusal to address the OP and play these silly games is really making it seem like you're not too interested in genuine discussion to determine the truth, but rather an intellectually dishonest troll who knows he's defending an untenable position.

Which would be shocking.

 

[Wildy]

what's my conclusion?

Good question. What is your conclusion?

And how exactly do you expect others to know it for you?

 

[stateofgrace]

Hey stateofgrace? Who did I accuse of mass murder? Is there any chance you will back up your accusations?

Another very good question HI. Who exactly are you accusing of mass murder?

I say your fellow countrymen but of course you could correct me and tell us who exactly you are accusing of carrying out mass murder.

Equally so you could actually stay on topic and try and show us all that you are worth responding to.

 

[TjW]

sigh...

One more time... what's my conclusion?

And if anyone you claim there internationally or otherwise came to a conclusion then on what evidence was it based? The internet? Or don't you need to know before you come to your conclusions?

Well, I have to do a lot of presuming here, because you seem to dodge and weave when asked straightforward questions. But here goes:

Presumably, you have come to the conclusion that another, or more investigation is needed. If this is not true, I have no idea why you would be so argumentative.

Now, if your conclusion is correct, you seem to have had access to enough information to conclude another, or more investigation is needed. A competent foreign intelligence service (FIS) should have come to this conclusion as well.

The FIS, of course, would have access to resources that you would likely not. Now, by resources, I don't mean agents in the U.S. to ferret out secret information of a closely held conspiracy, I mean qualified experts in the fields necessary to evaluate information.

There are many FIS that would have this level of competence. Some of them, of course, might be friendly to the U.S., or the Bush administration, and keep quiet.

There are governments though, that would gain politically from publicly embarrassing the Bush administration. Venezuela and N. Korea spring to mind.

I'd like to point out that for the purpose of political embarrassment, it is not required that the FIS discover proof of the actual perpetrators, or even what really happened.
All they have to do is present independently verifiable information of a plausible alternate to the consensus narrative. The alternate narrative, though, is crucial.

Depending on how broad you believe the conspiracy to be, it would be presented to foreign or the U.S. mainstream media. A complete alternate narrative with independently verifiable evidence implicating the U.S. government would certainly be news.

Considered as a weapon, it would do a lot of damage, both inside the U.S., and to its world reputation. It carries virtually no risk of retaliation.

Yet in seven years, no enemy of the U.S. has used it.
Are we really that popular?

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

One more time indeed. You keep asking this question even though it's been answered. Several times.

Interpol and foreign intelligence agencies have access to and could use the exact same evidence and information as those in the Truth Movement who are already proclaiming an inside job and demanding a new investigation. And yet they haven't.

Your constant refusal to address the OP and play these silly games is really making it seem like you're not too interested in genuine discussion to determine the truth, but rather an intellectually dishonest troll who knows he's defending an untenable position.

Which would be shocking.

Note the bolded.

The international community according to your bare assertion came to the conclusion there was nothing more to 9/11 then what the official version claims, and they came to this conclusion using the same thing you claim truthers have used.

The internet.

And their conclusion based on the internet was good enough for you? Why?

Thank you.

BTW I never claimed to know 9/11 was an inside job. There hasn't been enough of an investigation to come to a conclusion. That's the point. That's what makes you angry.

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

Good question. What is your conclusion?

And how exactly do you expect others to know it for you?

The truth movement and the debunkers don't know what happened on 9/11. The debunkers just pretend they do.

 

[beachnut]

The truth movement and the debunkers don't know what happened on 9/11. The debunkers just pretend they do.

Half right, and still you display no signs of knowledge on 9/11.

At least you are not pretending, you are void of evidence.

 

[twinstead]

BTW I never claimed to know 9/11 was an inside job. There hasn't been enough of an investigation to come to a conclusion. That's the point. That's what makes you angry.

No, what makes us angry is there HAS been enough of an investigation--from agencies around the world--to come to a conclusion, but you just stubbornly don't accept it.

 

[Homeland Insurgency]

Well, I have to do a lot of presuming here, because you seem to dodge and weave when asked straightforward questions. But here goes:

Presumably, you have come to the conclusion that another, or more investigation is needed. If this is not true, I have no idea why you would be so argumentative.

Now, if your conclusion is correct, you seem to have had access to enough information to conclude another, or more investigation is needed. A competent foreign intelligence service (FIS) should have come to this conclusion as well.

Based on what evidence that they had access to? That's a straight forward question BTW.

The FIS, of course, would have access to resources that you would likely not. Now, by resources, I don't mean agents in the U.S. to ferret out secret information of a closely held conspiracy, I mean qualified experts in the fields necessary to evaluate information.

Name exactly what they evaluated. Don't assume.

There are many FIS that would have this level of competence. Some of them, of course, might be friendly to the U.S., or the Bush administration, and keep quiet.

There are governments though, that would gain politically from publicly embarrassing the Bush administration. Venezuela and N. Korea spring to mind.

Has there been no foreign officials claiming doubts about 9/11? Is there nothing N Korea needs from the US? If there weren't would it prove something? Try harder.

I'd like to point out that for the purpose of political embarrassment, it is not required that the FIS discover proof of the actual perpetrators, or even what really happened.
All they have to do is present independently verifiable information of a plausible alternate to the consensus narrative. The alternate narrative, though, is crucial.

Based on what evidence that they had access to. Even it a FIS had evidence of something going on in America prior to 9/11 to come forth with said evidence could also expose how they came to such evidence. That wouldn't be very intelligent would it?

Depending on how broad you believe the conspiracy to be, it would be presented to foreign or the U.S. mainstream media. A complete alternate narrative with independently verifiable evidence implicating the U.S. government would certainly be news.

Again what evidence do they have access to and if they did could they admit it officially? I don't have a conspiracy. You have one if you believe in 19 conspirators. And you don't have a complete narrative either. Live up to your own standards.

Considered as a weapon, it would do a lot of damage, both inside the U.S., and to its world reputation. It carries virtually no risk of retaliation.

There is plenty of doubt worldwide about 9/11. There is also plenty of distrust towards America and it's government.

Yet in seven years, no enemy of the U.S. has used it.
Are we really that popular?

That's not true. Would you call Iran a friend of the US? Is there not officials from countries like Japan or Italy or Germany who have expressed doubts about 9/11? Most of those countries are suppose to be our friends. How much trust worldwide is there of America right now? Do you live under a rock?