Let us have a fact check.

Without Rights said:
The bombs wouldn't be on walls and on peoples desks, they would be behind the wall placed on the steel beams. I bet nobody saw any steel beams while they where being evacuated either, does that mean there weren't any?
Click to expand...

Thought we were dealing in facts, not delusions. With your logic there could be a bomb between those studs (in your wall) to your right, it could be ticking to take out one of the great question askers of our time. Using "They could be behind a wall" without any evidence of this is the weakest fact you have presented yet.
 
Without Rights said:
Countless people heard bombs, that is evidence.
Click to expand...

That's right: you can't count them, because they don't exist. Disagree? Then give me the contact information for these people who "heard bombs."

Fair enough? It's your claim, and it's a whopper. So do it.
 
defaultdotxbe said:
no, they heard explosions, not all exposions are bombs


although "flashes" are not bombs either, do you have a source for this?

did they flashes occur at the same time they heard explosions?


evidence of what? high temperatures? yeah, fire will do that


see above
Click to expand...

Everybody agrees that the fires were not hot enough to melt steel only weaken it. FEMA, 911 Commission and NIST. So where did the molten metal come from?
 
Let me try and simplify it for you. Here is your claim:
with all the cameras pointing at the Pentagon, they can't show us something besides the crap they did.
Click to expand...
You are complaining about the lack of any pictures/videos showing the plane hitting the pentagon. Now here were my questions:
DavidJames said:
How many cameras?
Where were they located?
Who monitored the cameras?
What type of cameras, still/video?
How often did they record images?

Provide primary sources for all your answers.
Click to expand...
You seem to believe the cameras should have captured the hit. My questions are trying to understand why you feel they should have. Your response, however was:
Without Rights said:
No, that's ignorant. Everybody knows there were cameras pointed at the Pentagon.
Click to expand...
which is odd since I never suggested there were no cameras. So you completely ignored my questions and posed a strawman. Why did you ignore my questions and pose a strawman in return?
 
Without Rights said:
Everybody agrees that the fires were not hot enough to melt steel only weaken it. FEMA, 911 Commission and NIST. So where did the molten metal come from?
Click to expand...
last time i looked at the periodic chart there was plenty of metal other than iron (steel) much of it with lower melting points, copper, aluminum and lead for example, all of which were likely present in large quantities in the WTC
 
Without Rights said:
That is a biased website. That's the same as me posting prisonplanet URL's
Click to expand...
The site is essentially a compilation of excerpts from external links. You can draw your own conclusions. The first link is from this forum.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77984

edit:
I routinely refer to and post information collected on Inside Job sites if it's well-sourced. I could collect all of Mike's links and post them here, but Mike has already done the work. What, are you afraid you'll be swayed by Mike's mind-controlling bias if you visit his site?
 
Last edited:
Without Rights said:
I can agree with everything except the pentagon statement. We have never seen a clear video or picture of a plane hitting the pentagon. I think a plane did hit it, but with all the cameras pointing at the Pentagon, they can't show us something besides the crap they did.
Click to expand...
Darn, you still do not have a clue, or even a small bag of clues.

Witnesses saw an airliner, some even said American airliner hit post and hit the Pentagon. Even the witnesses used by the CIT/Pentacon Con team saw the plane hit posts and run into the Pentagon. DNA from remains from bodies damaged in a 500 mph crash were recovered from the Pentagon from 77. The crash into the Pentagon was analyzed and was consistent with an aircraft impact. The video actually does show 77 coming down and hitting the Pentagon at a very slow frame rate. The fish eye lens makes it look like the plane had to go up hill to hit.

Flight 77 hit posts and knocked them down, only an airliner could do since an airliner was seen doing it.

ATC radar witnesses saw the blip of 77 dissapear and never come back at the Pentagon. RADAR photo, on tape. OF course they had to gather all the tapes to reconstruct the actually path along radar of 77, THUS confiming that 77 was the blip with no transponder; THUS closing the loop on the unknown blip with seen speeding across DC and Virginia.

Flight 77 let me count the ways. Now Without Rights should do his own fact search since he has never had a fact to support the CT ideas and claims. What a clue less person.
 
brodski said:
Wrong, “flying fuel laden 767’s into skyscrapers can make them collapse” is a fact. It is showing that the evidence based account is plausible, a fact which most Paranoid Conspiracy theorists dispute

ok, let me know which observed data the evidence based theory does not explain. Show how it undermines the evidence based theory.


No, it is a fact that there has been no competent structural engineering analysis done which refutes the NIST findings of collapse initiation. There has been no competent published analysis refuting the NIST statement that after collapse initiation, there is no reason to believe that collapse should have been arrested at any point.
Regimes like Iran are prepared to believe anything of the USA, and eth Bush administration in particular, Iran is also not above using their own academics to produce “academic” papers pushing Iran’s political beliefs (See their Holocaust denial conference, or their recent herbal AIDS “cure”). Any structural engineer in Iran 9and there are some) could make himself a national hero by proving that 9/11 was an inside job- yet none have taken that opportunity- and eth brilliant thing about science, is that people can check each others methods and results, so if the hypothetical Iranian structural engineer could provide robust evidence for his conclusions, other engineers would have to listen. This has not happened- there are only two explanations for this either
1) the NIST findings are so robust that even the holocaust revisionists in Iran can’t twist maths and science to give a credible alternative explanation for eth collapse of eth twin towers or
2) The conspiracy reaches to Iran and is preventing the “truth” from coming out even there.
Click to expand...

Another example from history: Under the Third Reich scientist were encouraged to prove Einstein's (and any Jewish physicist's) theories wrong. They were also "blacklisted" if they taught any of these theories.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Physik
 
Without Rights said:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/11/victims-list.htm
No hijackers names are on this list. Did they use fake names?
Click to expand...

This is tantamount to deliberately lying. This is not a passenger manifest, it is a list of victims. If you can count, compare the number of passengers on the lists with the number stated as being present on the plane.

"Partial lists of passengers and crew killed in Tuesday's terrorist attacks."

"American Airlines Flight 11: A Boeing 767 en route from Boston to Los Angeles. The plane, carrying 81 passengers, nine flight attendants and two pilots..."
75 of 81 passengers and 11 crew listed. This is not a manifest, it's a list of victims.

"United Airlines Flight 175: A Boeing 767 bound from Boston to Los Angeles. The plane was carrying 56 passengers, two pilots and seven flight attendants..."
48 of 56 passengers and 9 crew listed. This is not a manifest, it's a list of victims.

"American Airlines Flight 77: A Boeing 757 en route from Dulles Airport near Washington to Los Angeles. The plane was carrying 58 passengers, four flight attendants and two pilots..."
53 of 58 passengers and 6 crew listed. This is not a manifest, it's a list of victims.

"United Airlines Flight 93: A Boeing 757 en route from Newark, N.J., to San Francisco. The plane was carrying 37 passengers, two pilots and five flight attendants..."
31 of 37 passengers and 7 crew listed. This is not a manifest, its a list of victims.

I'll repeat: Passenger manifests containing the names of the hijackers were produced in evidence at Zacarias Moussaoui's trial. Are you claiming that earlier versions of the passenger manifests exist which do not show the names of the hijackers? If so, can you provide evidence for this claim?

Alternatively, can you explain why calling a victims list a passenger manifest isn't a lie?

Dave
 
Last edited:
Without Rights said:
Some say they observed a smaller looking aircraft also. They are facts yes, but isn't it said here that testimony can't be trusted because the "confusion" surrounding the events.
Click to expand...
I did not state, nor imply, that eye witness testimony is infallible. I stated that the flight was observed crashing in to the Pentagon. Do we need to take things to an ever more basic level?

  • A plane was observed crashing in to the North Tower of the WTC complex
  • A plane was observed crashing in to the South Tower of the WTC complex
  • A plane was observed crashing in to the Pentagon
  • Fires were observed in the North Tower of the WTC complex after the impact of a plane and continued to be observed until the collapse of the tower
  • Fires were observed in the South Tower of the WTC complex after the impact of a plane and continued to be observed until the collapse of the tower

Or even more basic?
  • An object was observed crashing in to the North Tower of the WTC complex
  • An object was observed crashing in to the South Tower of the WTC complex
  • An object was observed crashing in to the Pentagon
  • Fires were observed in the North Tower of the WTC complex after the impact of an object and continued to be observed until the collapse of the tower
  • Fires were observed in the South Tower of the WTC complex after the impact of an object and continued to be observed until the collapse of the tower
Yes, let's start there. Forget my prior list and just deal with the five most recent points.
 
Last edited:
Without Rights said:
Mistaken identity? So how are they now sure who the hijackers are? The FBI said there is no proof.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/11/victims-list.htm
No hijackers names are on this list. Did they use fake names?
Click to expand...
What, are you new? This proves you are just a fact less truther with out a clue. As you have been told, victim list. You need to go to the terrorist list.

The terrorist had to come to the country and they had papers. They left a trail. They bought tickets, they had cars. They had visas and passports. Why are you so challenged on 9/11? This is the easy stuff so far, what facts and evidence do you want next?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom