Just Another Saturday At Ground Zero

deep44 said:
Almost everyone who currently supports a new investigation believed the US Government's official story at one point in time, myself included.

You, on the other hand, have always believed the US Government's official story.

I'll leave it to you to figure out why the statement quoted above makes absolutely zero sense.
Click to expand...

DGM said:
The US government has an "official story"? Why didn't any one tell me?
Click to expand...

Jonnyclueless said:
Can you provide a link to the government official story for us?
Click to expand...
I would like to read it as well. Also be so kind as to send us the complete alternative narrative to the events of the day that the evidence collected by the TM has been able to put together to contradict the "Official Story," and necessitate the need for a new investigation.
 
Guys, guys!! You have to remember, CT’s are much less like science than they are like marketing. It doesn’t matter what something means, it only matters how it sounds!
 
Par said:
If you cannot even conceive of how else the attacks could have happened, then you’re never going to get anywhere. I’m glad, incidentally, that this isn’t my problem.
Click to expand...
deep44 said:
I'll leave it to you to figure out why the statement quoted above makes absolutely zero sense.
Click to expand...


I don’t think that it does make “zero sense”. I don’t think that you believe that yourself. I think you’re bluffing and attempting to change the subject. But all means, explain why it makes “zero sense”.
 
deep44 said:
That's why everyone involved is pushing for a new investigation - the focus of that new investigation would be proposing and/or testing new/old theories. The most important thing to understand right now is what didn't happen.
Click to expand...

The point is you cannot hope to define yourself against these 'no-plane' people in any way other than what you are not.
 
Par said:
I don’t think that it does make “zero sense”. I don’t think that you believe that yourself. I think you’re bluffing and attempting to change the subject. But all means, explain why it makes “zero sense”.
Click to expand...


I already explained it. You're not a stupid person - if you can't figure it out based on the content of my previous reply, then you're clearly being disingenuous.
 
And as for the so-called qualified members of the Truth movement, I don't so much question their qualifications as I question whether they actually support the Truth movement.

Has anybody contacted these people and asked what they really think about 9/11?
 
CptColumbo said:
I would like to read it as well. Also be so kind as to send us the complete alternative narrative to the events of the day that the evidence collected by the TM has been able to put together to contradict the "Official Story," and necessitate the need for a new investigation.
Click to expand...


Sure - go ahead and read every paper listed on this webpage:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

..that will serve as a good starting point. Let me know when you're done and we'll move forward in a new thread.

PS - there will be a quiz.
 
Par said:
I don’t think that it does make “zero sense”. I don’t think that you believe that yourself. I think you’re bluffing and attempting to change the subject. But all means, explain why it makes “zero sense”.
Click to expand...
deep44 said:
I already explained it. You're not a stupid person - if you can't figure it out based on the content of my previous reply, then you're clearly being disingenuous.
Click to expand...


This is the second time that you’ve attempted to avoid giving an explanation. Assume that I’m stupid, if you like: Explain why it makes “zero sense”. Make it clear.
 
Next time I visit NYC, I know where to go to for a few laughs.
I would say the Truther Revolution is devouring it's own children except it was never a real revolution.
I love the poor cops trying to keep things in some kind of order.
All that is missing is the classic Irish cop line "Show's over, Move along now, Nothing Left to See".
 
deep44 said:
Sure - go ahead and read every paper listed on this webpage:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

..that will serve as a good starting point. Let me know when you're done and we'll move forward in a new thread.

PS - there will be a quiz.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to be a single narrative, and from the titles of the articles there is no evidence present other than the same old long debunked crap that the TM has been lying about for the last 6 years.

Still waiting for a link to the "US Government's official story."
 
This video just screams of hypocrisy.

WAC argues this man's death is none of the no planer's business and that her sign slanders him. Yet, when it comes to Charles Burlingame, they have absolutely no issue accusing him of being a terrorist, and somehow the last phone calls made by victims on Flight 93 is their business.

The only thing that wasn't hypocritical is this women accused WAC of having "guilty knowledge" of Dan's death; still paranoid and insane as usual.
 
deep44 said:
That's why everyone involved is pushing for a new investigation - the focus of that new investigation would be proposing and/or testing new/old theories. The most important thing to understand right now is what didn't happen.
Click to expand...

220 academics, and they aren't capable of performing an investigation?

They can't even go so far as to put forth a plausible alternate hypothesis as to what happened on 9/11?

I don't know where these academics got their degrees, but I think they should get their money back.
 
deep44 said:
Sure - go ahead and read every paper listed on this webpage:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

..that will serve as a good starting point. Let me know when you're done and we'll move forward in a new thread.

PS - there will be a quiz.
Click to expand...
Failure to comprehend these papers? They are junk? I have read the papers, they are all worthless and lack evidence to support the conclusion. Pathetic papers. I can't find anything good about them, except, The biggest joke ! You can use the references given to debunk the papers! BUSTED (may not for deep44, but intelligent, knowledgeable people can look up and use the reference given by these dolts in their own papers to debunk their work)


PS - looks like you flunked the quiz. Wait, 9/11 truth can't answer question, they just ask questions.
 
Last edited:
theauthor said:
So you defend the official story without even knowing what it is?
Click to expand...


How can he answer that without you referencing what "the official story" is?

How do you make an accusation of something you can't even define?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom