Moderated Legitimate 9/11 Questions

If you light up your grill with diesel oil the bad smell and taste will be gone when the coals are red, and the last diesel evaporated/burned.

If you ram an airplane into the ground a bit of the fuel will be slammed so far into the ground that it will escape the heat and still be there after the fire have died out.
You can test it by pouring some gasoline on the ground and light it, it will still smell after the fire die out, especially if you dig a bit.

I don´t know what % a bit is, but guess that almost all the fuel will disapear as a fireball.
 
KreeL said:
The ability to edit the 'official version' of 9/11 was the benefit.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense.

According to you, the "official version" is whatever the Bush administration tells us as verified (at least through consent by silence) by a world full of amoral, cowardly experts.

Why would they then need a couple of planted documentarians to further establish what has already been overwhelmingly established?
 
beachnut said:
Your posts proves you are exercising faulty logic and lack knowledge on 911.

You were told why they were filming and you make up moronic lies about it.
Click to expand...

It's because of unsupported allegations like the one Beech here is responding to that I have him on ignore. Again, he presents nothing but allegations; he's an Ultima with better grammar and spelling. He's been told what the truth is, yet he breezily ignores it to make a strident yet unproven comment.

We should ignore him. He's not helping T.A.M.'s thread along at all.
 
It makes perfect sense. The ability to edit the official version of 9/11 gives immense power to those in control. You can show the masses what you want them to see. You can allow them to hear what you want them to hear. With voice over narration you tell them what to believe.

The Naudets were a powerful tool.
 
KreeL said:
Questions about the Naudets are valid. Their film proves foreknowledge. Everyone here has surely watched it by now.
Click to expand...
Are you interested enough in 9/1 to have watched the film?

Just asking.
 
RedIbis said:
Dtugg was attempting to suggest that the reason jet fuel survived the impacts of the towers was lack of oxygen, which is why little or no jet fuel was found in the soil at Shanksville.

Granted, it is twisted, but by this logic there would be no fuel contaminated soil at crash sites
Click to expand...

So what are you getting at? Do you honestly believe that there is any possibility that Flight 93 did NOT crash at Shanksville?

If this is what you believe, then I'd love to hear your alternate hypothesis that has fewer problems with it than the supposed absence of contaminated soil.

If not, then why do you think this is a reasonable question that is of interest to anyone?
 
KreeL said:
It makes perfect sense. The ability to edit the official version of 9/11 gives immense power to those in control. You can show the masses what you want them to see. You can allow them to hear what you want them to hear. With voice over narration you tell them what to believe.

The Naudets were a powerful tool.
Click to expand...

I and others have answered the question you asked. If you are not satisfied, then I do not know what to tell you. Regardless, unless there is a pressing matter related to it, in the spirit of the thread, can we move on?

TAM:)
 
The Naudet film is all you need. OCTers always balk when the subject of the Naudets comes up. They try to handwave them away. Why? I believe the Naudets served their purpose quite well, but now the OCTers want them to disappear. Go away.

The agents planted inside the Duane St. fire department are the key to unraveling the entire event of 9/11 inside the WTC. To capture the entire event they had to know what was going to happen. Precisely where. Exactly when.
 
KreeL said:
The Naudet film is all you need. OCTers always balk when the subject of the Naudets comes up. They try to handwave them away. Why? I believe the Naudets served their purpose quite well, but now the OCTers want them to disappear. Go away.

The agents planted inside the Duane St. fire department are the key to unraveling the entire event of 9/11 inside the WTC. To capture the entire event they had to know what was going to happen. Precisely where. Exactly when.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. Documentary film makers making documentaries. How sinister. How suspicious.

How freaking stupid.
 
aggle-rithm said:
So what are you getting at? Do you honestly believe that there is any possibility that Flight 93 did NOT crash at Shanksville?

If this is what you believe, then I'd love to hear your alternate hypothesis that has fewer problems with it than the supposed absence of contaminated soil.

If not, then why do you think this is a reasonable question that is of interest to anyone?
Click to expand...

It's reasonable to ask about soil analyses. To prevent further sidetracking of this discussion, I'd like to repeat my question:

Was there a soil analysis done at Shanksville? And what were the results of those tests?

To which I found this answer:


The soil is being tested for jet fuel, and at least three test wells have been sunk to monitor groundwater, since three nearby homes are served by wells, Betsy Mallison, a state Department of Environmental Protection spokeswoman, said.

So far, no contamination has been discovered, she said.
Click to expand...

Which brings me to another legitimate question:

How did a commercial airliner loaded with 5500 gallons of jet fuel crash into soil without any fuel contamination?

If there is any specific follow up information about the conclusions of the soil analyses, please post them.
 
RedIbis said:
It's reasonable to ask about soil analyses.
Click to expand...

In a discussion about soil, perhaps. Not here.

To prevent further sidetracking of this discussion, I'd like to repeat my question:

Was there a soil analysis done at Shanksville? And what were the results of those tests?

To which I found this answer:




Which brings me to another legitimate question:

How did a commercial airliner loaded with 5500 gallons of jet fuel crash into soil without any fuel contamination?

If there is any specific follow up information about the conclusions of the soil analyses, please post them.
Click to expand...

Stop playing games. Your questions have a hidden agenda. You want to raise doubt in the minds of others, perhaps in the hopes that your fantasies will somehow become their reality. Or perhaps for some other reason. Who cares?

It's not going to happen here. Please, take your intellectual dishonesty elsewhere.
 
JimBenArm said:
Ah, yes. Documentary film makers making documentaries. How sinister. How suspicious.

How freaking stupid.
Click to expand...

I would think that since the towers were such an enormous landmark that the chances of somebody being at the right place at the right time would be pretty high... **** happens, it's no indication that they were somehow "in on it." I recall a program that aired on CBS a few months after the attack which detailed some of their footage on daily NYPD activities... of coursed you're damned by the CT's regardless
 
Maybe there were not enough fuel left to reach the groundwater?

I am interested in how the hijackers could afford flightschool and cover their living and travel expenses.
There were some nasty allegations of how terrorist moneyflow could/would not be traced because they used the same channels* as corrupt politicians/contributors.


*Bahama bank?
 
johnny karate said:
In what way is soil analysis at the Shanksville site relevant to understanding the events of 9/11, and therefore "reasonable" to question?
Click to expand...

The jet fuel contaminated the groundwater!!!

Now who do I get mad at for that? Whose fault is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom