Questions for 911files about his research

[Drudgewire]

SHE.

Six minutes too late.

 

[Turbofan]

I KNEW that. [qimg]http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/doh.gif[/qimg]

Well, the victory dance has been downgraded from "Snoopy" to "Snoop Dogg."

[qimg]http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/snoop.gif[/qimg]

Considering LashL has shown more than hatred for CIT, I wouldnt be so quick to do a victory dance till the verdict is in from the OC Prosecutor. I also didnt realize she is in Toronto. Although it shouldnt matter much as does her bias.

But I will admit I was wrong in reading her past interpretations. I'd look for them to quote, but I suppose none of this matters on a message board. The victory dance will come for one of us eventually though...


I'll still hold to my theory that the OC Prosecutor will tell Farmer to pound sand and stop his crying.

By the way 911Files, what type of "investigator" do you have? A guy with a badge as deduced by Drudge? Is it a detective? If so, which PCT in the OC? The first clue is you said "agency" instead of precinct. Sounds like a private investigator. If part of a Federal Agency, well then he should be familiar with CFR Title 18 when recording other Federal Officers.

 

[Tricky]

This thread is going downhill in a hurry. Switching to moderated status.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[LashL]

Ever practice law in the US?

I have done quite a lot of cross-border litigation, thanks for asking.

By the way, does anyone know if the "prostitute" or Globe International was prosecuted by PA for violating their recording/consent laws?

I have no idea. You'll have to check the state courts to find out.

According to LashL, they should have been prosecuted.

I did not say any such thing.

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

911files,

You just stated in this thread:

I have found solid evidence that may have been altered, the operative word is MAY.

The words "solid" and "may" make for a rather interesting contrast. So is it solid or not? But you really answered this question further as you continued...

And yes, I have already demonstrated that the CSV file data has been altered.

Ahh ok so you admit that the NTSB data definitely HAS been altered. Thanks for that.

You continued...

Was some of the public release information altered and doctored? There is no doubt in my mind that it was.

Once again reaffirming this belief that you obviously have held since early 2007 and possibly before. Curious though....do you understand how this would set a precedent wherein other government provided data should be automatically considered suspect?

If not why? Don't you agree that "alteration" or "doctoring" of evidence would implicate a cover-up of a crime?

You went on...

The Pentagon gate camera footage does have issues, and again I don't think most people here deny that either. That is a far cry from flying the plane over the Pentagon.

Really?

Care to make a poll thread to see how many members here think the Pentagon security gate camera footage has "issues"? Any members here care to back him up on this? And what exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean that you currently think the security camera has also been "doctored" just as you believe regarding the NTSB data?

Now you go on to say "that's a far cry from flying the plane over the Pentagon" but you also just sent an essay to publish in Gaffney's book that asserts just that. And as Gaffney said you provide "eyewitness testimony and physical evidence" to support it.

The physical evidence he was referring to of course is the citgo security video that you believe supports the citgo witnesses' independently corroborated claim of a plane on the north side.

So please help me understand why you would allow these assertions to be published in this new book if you don't believe them, or think that evidence is "wanting" for this as you said in this post.

I really find it odd that you could possibly think that the citgo security video corroborates the unanimous claim of the citgo witnesses (and many more) yet still call corroboration of evidence on this level "wanting".

To sum it up....you agree that government data has been altered, you agree that the citgo video confirms the citgo witnesses' north side account, you have no problem publishing these assertions in a distributed book as completely valid and evidence based, and naturally you must understand that all of this points to a military deception on 9/11.....yet you insist on quitting the "truth movement" and remaining hostile towards CIT who uncovered the majority this evidence that you have asserted as valid and corroborated?

Correct?

 

[chillzero]

To support the switch to moderated status I have moved posts to AAH, and rejected some responses. Please stop the bickering about CIT, and personalised posts.

Keep this thread civil and on topic from this point.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

 

[BCR]

LB, this will be my final response on this thread, because I agree with Chillzero. If it was constructive, I would participate, but it is more argumentative than anything.

Yes LB, as I have already said, many of these folks I have communicated with outside of the forum, and we agree there remains a lot to be learned about the events of 9/11. There are anomalies in a lot of the government data and if an applicable thread devoted to any single one opens, I will happily discuss it.

Here is the difference that escapes you. An anomaly in the data set does not mean "inside job" or alteration for nefarious purposes. There can often be technical explanations for the same anomaly (or simply someone messed up). I have learned over the past several years that if a person keeps digging, some questions can be resolved without any such speculation. I have seen these folks work with the NTSB animation to great lengths for example. They do not deny that the heading is greater than the FDR reports, but they don't go from that observation to ... "911 is an inside job". The key is, they should not make that jump, and through thorough research a number of alternative explanations have been offered. Some I agree with, some I do not, but they remain valid explanations non-the-less.

These are very intelligence folks residing here. If you give them evidence in the terms an intelligent person can work with, then I think like me they would love to explore it. But if you give them an anomaly in the data and scream "911 is an inside job", they are going to rightly tell you that you are...well pick the response.

So yes, it may surprise you, but JREF folks are rational, thinking individuals. Honest folks can disagree about what the data means and work together to find a common resolution, unless one of them is wearing the blinders of seeing everything as evidence of a pre-determined conclusion.

 

[Alareth]

Not our burden to offer a theory. It is up to the govt to prove theirs.

Wow, you have a deep and intrinsically flawed understanding of how all this works.

 

[TheLoneBedouin]

911files,

So does that mean you changed your position from yesterday when you said there was "no doubt" in your mind that publicly released information was "altered and doctored"?

Obviously that is a far cry from an "anomaly". This thread is about your previous statements and research. Nobody has claimed that an innocent technical anomaly = 9/11 was an inside job so I'm not sure why you went off on that tangent. Don't you agree that "alteration" or "doctoring" of evidence would implicate a cover-up of a crime and set a precedent wherein all forthcoming data from the implicated party should be considered automatically suspect?

But you have gone much further than that. You only recently sent an essay to be published in a distributed book asserting a north side flyover and you provide "eyewitness testimony and physical evidence" to support it.

Obviously you must see this evidence as valid since you cited it and had it published only weeks ago. Certainly you understand how a north side flyover of anything at all at the same time of the attack proves a deliberate deception and cover-up on 9/11.

Right?

 

[twinstead]

Artificial burden of proof shifting ROCKS!

 

[Drudgewire]

Wow, you have a deep and intrinsically flawed understanding of how all this works.

It's actually quite telling in regards to what the most lofty goals of the movement actually are. If their purpose/mission was discover "what really happened" and get the word out... or for that matter to truly gain insight about the events leading up to 9/11 and the day itself, they'd start with a hypothesis and work towards proving it. For everything that can be said about the early "names" in the movement, there was at least a blueprint towards this end.

But "it's up to the government to prove their story" is not only circular, it's a clear indication the "just asking questions" nu-twoof contingent is perfectly content to simply throw stones at the wall. Considering, even if there WAS a conspiracy, they've successfully stifled it to the point the already miniscule amount of people who ever believed otherwise dwindles by the day, what would the conspirators POSSIBLY have to gain by attempting to placate the tiny percentage of people who not only won't believe anything they say regardless, but who haven't provided a shred of evidence worth answering to?

I was talking to a girl the other day who wasn't really educated to the facts on 9/11, and she brought up things like "stand-down orders" and a few of the other long-debunked issues. I told her the same thing I've said on here a hundred times: the SECOND any kind of valid evidence which can honestly contradict everything we do know, I'll be back on the CT bus quicker than you can say "cover-up."

But TLB's response, despite the furor a lot of truthers have brought me over the last few years, did something far worse: It saddened me. It belies a motivation perhaps not as sinister as some of the more paranoid "critical thinkers" think twoofers have... but it's far more pathetic.

 

[Obviousman]

Turbofan is trying to make a comeback:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=172289&st=135

 

[leftysergeant]

Turbofan is trying to make a comeback:

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=172289&st=135

Good to know that the residents of the venue he has invaded readily recognized him as a freaking moron.

 

[thecritta]

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for civility.

 

[thecritta]

Considering LashL has shown more than hatred for CIT, I wouldnt be so quick to do a victory dance till the verdict is in from the OC Prosecutor. I also didnt realize she is in Toronto. Although it shouldnt matter much as does her bias.

But I will admit I was wrong in reading her past interpretations. I'd look for them to quote, but I suppose none of this matters on a message board. The victory dance will come for one of us eventually though...


I'll still hold to my theory that the OC Prosecutor will tell Farmer to pound sand and stop his crying.

By the way 911Files, what type of "investigator" do you have? A guy with a badge as deduced by Drudge? Is it a detective? If so, which PCT in the OC? The first clue is you said "agency" instead of precinct. Sounds like a private investigator. If part of a Federal Agency, well then he should be familiar with CFR Title 18 when recording other Federal Officers.

So turbofan why did you leave pilotsfor911truth.org as one of the self pro claimed experts over there, you did leave in quiet a hurry i may say?

Huh come on now give us an answer

 

[thecritta]

Yeah well anyway demolishing the towers with explosives powerful enough to cut
steel would have been a very bad idea, because the gig would be up straight away
oh yeah right huge booms and flashes as the towers come down in a apparent collapse
and of course if they did this everyone would realise what is really going on, and the
perps would be faaaarked bad idea if they did demolish the towers the had to use
super duper nanothermite or something else what else could have they have used besides nanothermite?

And please dont say GRAVITY

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Telltale Tom may not be the only truther here who's talking sense...

Yeah well anyway demolishing the towers with explosives powerful enough to cut
steel would have been a very bad idea, because the gig would be up straight away
oh yeah right huge booms and flashes as the towers come down in a apparent collapse
and of course if they did this everyone would realise what is really going on, and the
perps would be faaaarked bad idea

Yep. Your argument destroys that hypothesis.

if they did demolish the towers the had to use
super duper nanothermite or something else what else could have they have used besides nanothermite?

And please dont say GRAVITY

Here's a possibility that deserves to be more widely considered: a kinetic energy weapon bearing a substantial thermobaric payload.

 

[DGM]

So turbofan why did you leave pilotsfor911truth.org as one of the self pro claimed experts over there, you did leave in quiet a hurry i may say?

Huh come on now give us an answer

Just to let you know, your talking to yourself. Turbofan was banned (along with a few of his socks).

 

[thecritta]

Just to let you know, your talking to yourself. Turbofan was banned (along with a few of his socks).

Goddamit i was hoping for some answers is turbofan 911files?

 

[DGM]

Goddamit i was hoping for some answers is turbofan 911files?

9/11 files is John Farmer (now BCR on this forum) no relation to John Farmer of the 9/11 commission or Turbofan.