response to emerging independent science on the 9/11 attacks

[Animavore]

Did I miss anyone out?

The President. This shit goes all the way to the top man.

[Trolldor]

No man, the President is a stooge, it's the illuminati which control it all! They're fighting the Freemasons who are actually a subsidary of the Greys!

[Clinton Huxley]

If you are not part of the conspiracy, you are part of the conspiracy

[Trolldor]

That's what they want you to think!

[Clinton Huxley]

That's what they want you to think!

That's what I think I want....errr...no, hang on, that's not it....err...I think they want me to want to think that.......hmmm?

[Trolldor]

Exactly! Now you've got it!

But don't tell anyone, they can hear it all, they're probably watching you right now...

[Clinton Huxley]

Exactly! Now you've got it!

But don't tell anyone, they can hear it all, they're probably watching you right now...

Great Scott! You've penetrated right to the rotten heart of the conspiracy. Watch your back, BAA.....if indeed, you ARE BAA

[Conny]

So you're having fun making fun of what i wrote.

But might i remind you that the USAgovt version is also a conspiracy?

as i said before, where is the evidence for their version? the "omission report"?

[Animavore]

So you're having fun making fun of what i wrote.

But might i remind you that the USAgovt version is also a conspiracy?

as i said before, where is the evidence for their version? the "omission report"?

The version of the government has been backed by independent researchers such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology and The American Society of Civil Engineers who both confirm that the building was not destroyed in a controlled explosion and that it was the impact of the collisions and the fires which caused the buildings to collapse.

[Thinking Aloud]

So you're having fun making fun of what i wrote.

But might i remind you that the USAgovt version is also a conspiracy?

as i said before, where is the evidence for their version? the "omission report"?

The version of the government has been backed by independent researchers such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology and The American Society of Civil Engineers who both confirm that the building was not destroyed in a controlled explosion and that it was the impact of the collisions and the fires which caused the buildings to collapse.

They've all got "National" or "American" in their names, so they're part of the conspiracy. And "of".

[Cunt]

So you're having fun making fun of what i wrote.

But might i remind you that the USAgovt version is also a conspiracy?

as i said before, where is the evidence for their version? the "omission report"?

Thanks for taking the time to state your beliefs on this matter.

Now I would like to ask you, what evidence would cause you to accept that your beliefs were unjustified and probably wrong?

I'll use Clinton Huxley's summary, since I think he pared down your position to point form...

1) They used some patsies to take airplane lessons, so they could blame them later,
2) got together with the owner of Twin Towers and which were asbestos laden and no longer a revenue,
3) slowly had "teams" place the army-made explosives (i am not versed in that stuff) highly insured the buildings,
4) "fortified" a side of the Pentagon with certain missile guidance system,
5) took some remote controlled jets, loaded them with extra explosive charges,
6) re-routed two or three of the jets to Ohio,
7) made them land. (who knows what happened to the passengers? they were forced to make phone calls?)( maybe put them all into the) one jet that got shot down over Pa.?,
8) sent a missile into Pentagon
9) via something that was made to look like a plane.
10) Got people into the right position to say within an hour or so it was done by A-Q.
11) Some decided to make even more money and took out put options on the airplane companies.

So what evidence would cause you to change any of these assumptions? What would it take for you to admit that you were wrong on some of these points?

[Conny]

i'm not the mood right now. Maybe you can think up a few things to reply to me for a change...hm?

[Coito ergo sum]

So you're having fun making fun of what i wrote.

But might i remind you that the USAgovt version is also a conspiracy?

Well, of course. A conspiracy is just an agreement among two or more people to commit a crime or some nefarious act. The Muslims agreed among themselves to commit the crimes and other nefarious acts on 9/11/01.

The difference is that your position is more of a "Conspiracy Theory," which is the idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public. Examples include the Moon Hoax theorists and the Area 51 Alien Spacecraft conspiracy.

as i said before, where is the evidence for their version? the "omission report"?

Where is the evidence?

1. Flight data recorders
2. Air traffic controller data and recordings
3. Cell phone records and recordings
4. Many and varied video footage of the events in question on 9/11/01
5. Airport security video tapes
6. Documentary records regarding the individuals involved in the plots
7. Flight school records and witness testimony
8. Direct testimony from Moussaui
9. Direct testimony from Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, admitting to the plot
10. Data obtain in Afghanistan including computer data and documents concerning the plot
11. Direct admissions by Osama bin Laden admitting that Al Qaeta did it.
12. Declassified intelligence report indicating: "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings" and "bin Laden determined to attack inside the United States.
13. An intelligence report in May 2001 indicating that al Qaeda was trying to send operatives to the United States through Canada to carry out an attack using explosives.
14. Bin Laden's Declaration of War on the United States in 1998
15. Series of attacks from early 1990s on, leading up to the attack on 9/11/01 all by Islamic terrorists, all against the United States, and all for the same ostensible reasons (Embassy bombings in Kenya/Tanzania, USS Cole, Khobar Towers, WTC 1993, etc.).
16. Financial information and data demonstrating a money trail involving the hijackers and known planners of 9/11/01
17. A host of other information...

That's just off the top of my head.

[Tigger]

My work here is done.

[Cunt]

i'm not the mood right now. Maybe you can think up a few things to reply to me for a change...hm?

I asked you what kind of evidence could change your mind.

You aren't in the MOOD?

What the fuck, Conny? Why are you here then? To state what you believe without taking any chances that you might be wrong?

I think that is one of the most arrogant positions I have ever heard clearly stated. I will be happy to continue this conversation with anyone who doesn't have the 'Truthtm'.

Fucking believers...how DOES one deal rationally with them?

I wish we could 'sage' on this thread....