If you dont' have anything of value to offer this thread, other than your tired out anti-semitism, hit the road. Both you and your claim are full of (*)(*)(*)(*).
Is that some sort of a slur? (Where's granny when you need her?) [video=youtube;5H2wr0khnJA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5H2wr0khnJA[/video]
"Outsmarting" isn't the word. It's more like cheating. You're forgetting. It's the lies and thefts that get to people. If you didn't make a religion out of them, people might not be so "anti-Semitic". They especially resent the murders. But then, I think most people object to be done that way, especially by people who put up a front of being "allies" but then stab you back the first time your head is turned. Do you have any comments about that?
How the hell do you get this being evidence. Those red chips are obviously paint knocked off of a structural steel object. Grow up people. No, despite what idiot boy chandler measured on one spot, the whole WTC7 did not fall at free-fall acceleration until after the whole inside of the building was gone. Jeeeez!
Yes - your paranoia and bigotry is clouding your vision. You are creating boogie men based on false claims.
The Jews have no room to talk about someone else being "paranoid" considering the way they go on and on about "anti-Semitism" as though there is a Nazi under every bush just waiting for a chance to create a "holocaust". [video=youtube;4fvJ8nFa5Qk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fvJ8nFa5Qk[/video]
I know the talk is a lengthy one, but did you listen to it? I believe the lady made herself fairly clear on the matter. Although her presentation was close to three hours, it takes that long to cover that much material, and that is by no means all that can be said on the subject. This is especially true when dealing with DeBunkers who try to stop you every minute or so demanding mathematical proof for every statement that's made and whether the sun actually rises. I don't recall having ever watched an episode of Perry Mason or even portions of real life trials where the entire body of evidence rested completely on the verity of a mathematical formula or the jury's ability to interpret it.
That's because real life is not like Perry Mason, nor is watching snippets of trials on the news comparable to the depths of evidence in a full trial.
Right. In real life you have both the prosecution and the defense calling in their "experts", each giving a testimony as to this or that which directly contradicts that of the other. The public trial of 9/11 is no different. DeBunkers have their "experts". Truthers have theirs. Only the DeBunkers, belong to the set of Kosher bots have the full force of the bully pulpit to present their case, ie the media ,whereas the Truther crowd is like a poor man that has to have a state appointed re[resentative to stand up to the New York team of high powered Shysters. In the end, the verdict has been like the one delivered in the OJ Simpson trial, based more on political correctness than evidence. The difference there being that one of the murder victims happened to be a Jew, so the Jews were still able to find a way to put OJ in jail despite the threats of blacks to riot. Also, in the real life verdict rendered about 9/11, the Zionists were in charge of the entire investigation as well as having their own real life judges appointed to make the rulings. One can attest to their irreproachable judgements and their unimpeachable honesty, but the skeptics still have their doubts. It isn't that any of these are things which money cannot buy. One of the favorite DeBunker tactics used to choke the Truth movement is to demand a mathematical proof for the collapses of the buildings which they know in advance can't satisfactorily be done. That's aside from the fact that few people would be able to verify those "proofs" in their own minds even if they could possibly be given. The DeBunkers know that as long as they can confine all evidence permitted to areas which require advanced math (and specific knowledge which is unattainable) they can limit the audience to a sufficiently low number which can easily be brushed off. Such is the case with "A&E for 9/11 Truth". This way they never have to confront the mountain of evidence that doesn't require a degree to appreciate, all of which points directly to FOREKNOWLEDGE, COVER UP, and CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS. The DeBunkers have still not given a motive as to why all these doubters would want to make such a stink about 9/11 to begin with, whereas the motive for the attacks, the cover up, the controlled demolitions have already been presented. It's equally apparent who had the means, the motive, and the opportunity. All you can do is persist in denying them. That's all I expect from you. I would have hoped for more from the American public.
yep another miserable fail by the coincidence theorist DEBWUNKERS..comedy gold. Yeah his conspiracy theory he has forgets to mention that the US was paying Bin Laden and he was a CIA asset,that the Bin Ladens had a close friendship with the Bush family,that Rumsfield was in charge of the air defense system instead of the normal person that always is that day,ignoring that Bush cousin was in charge of the secuirty of the towers,and that many of the aleeged highjackers turned up alive.ignoring the PNAC agreement that was documnted in 1999 that to get support from the american people to invade IRAQ,they needed a NEW PEARL HARBOUR EVENT,that right there explains the governments motive for the attacks,they had the means in the fact that key government officials were in charge that day such as Cheney at the pentagon and Rumsfield with the air defense systems,that was the perfect opportunity right there with key government officials in charge of all the planning. yeah sure was a cute story and like you said,cute story but no evidence to support it.miserable fail as always.as usual,he has egg on his face Mod Edit ~ Rule 3/Flame baiting
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm It's one thing to mix up an identical name, but it is another thing altogether to use the wrong picture of the person who the F.B.I. thinks did it. Unless this is a case of a doppelganger with the same name too. That would be a very strange coincidence.
My god, you mean there was another Waleed Al Shehri in the world who also happened to be a pilot? And there are other arabs out there who share the same name as some of the other hijackers? I think you've cracked it! Quick, call the media, go grab your Pulitzer.. Guess you missed this part down the bottom: - - - Updated - - - I've been asking for years for one, just one single video interview with any of these 'alive' hijackers. Seems to be nil, zip, zero, nothing, nada, anywhere of these guys. You'd think they would be rather famous, wouldn't you?
Calm down. Apparently you didn't read what I linked to. I'll highlight so you can keep up: What does this mean? It means that the F.B.I. got the name and picture wrong of their suspect, and that he gave interviews afterwards. Basically, everything you asked.
The FBI changed the names of some of the alleged hijackers several times in the first few days. It's just like the alleged Bin Laden assassination story, it also changed several times in the first 24 hours. The US government can never get their lies straight. "Truth never changes, lies change all the time" - (don't know the author of the quote)
bull(*)(*)(*)(*) ... the government would have had them killed to cover the story ... that's how big this cover up is ... right? ... Geraldo Rivera would have been all over this ... damn ... you people are so gullible ...
yeah ... we're going to fly planes into buildings and "something" into the Pentagon and plant explosives in three buildings and some light poles and then blame some dudes that are still alive? ... brilliant plan ... lmfao ...