So going by that "logic" you likely will deny that your blood is made of cells, your desk is made of atoms, and Neptune is a planet based on the fact that you haven't seen them.
As the "claimant", I'm a very open-minded guy, for example at one time I suspected the Apollo 11 moon landing might have been faked because of lots of things pointing to that fact, but in the end I discounted the theory because I just couldn't believe that Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins were liars. Likewise with 9/11 I can't believe that it was a false flag to get an excuse to invade the mideast, because the US government didn't need such an excuse, they already had plenty of reasons to invade..
The proof that the moon missions were faked is as crushing as the proof that 9/11 was an inside job is. http://www.politicalforum.com/moon-landing/347662-apollo-moon-missions-were-faked-studio.html http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=456423&p=1066183060#post1066183060 Proof trumps opinion. http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=456423&p=1066183060#post1066183060
The reality of what was broadcast on TV on 9/11 and what was not is reality and fact, period. So the above is just more ridiculous nonsense. None of the above has anything to do with the fact that Muslims were never seen by anyone on TV crashing planes on 9/11 and that there is no TV broadcast of any plane crashing into the Pentagon, which is the fallacious claim (same as the above quote). If I'm wrong, please provide a link to any TV broadcast that shows Muslims crashing into those buildings on 9/11 and I'll retract my claim that you and the claimant are both delusional and apologize to you both. Until then it is what it is and you are what you are.
That may or may not be but it has nothing to do with your claim that you actually saw Muslims on TV on 9/11 crashing planes into the WTC and Pentagon, which you keep insisting is true. For reality, as opposed to delusions, did you even bother to go through the 9/11 facts listed in the links I provided (and some in this thread) or do you just want to keep your blinders on, Mr. "very open-minded guy"?
Can we please just stick to 9/11 facts in this thread? Thanks. Having said that, IMO the only conclusive proof that 9/11 was an inside job is the obvious lack of any action by the US government on and after 9/11 to try to prevent or stop it from happening, the intellectually insulting excuses, and the actions/non-actions by the US government following 9/11 to coverup the crime. Beyond that, everything else is circumstantial, not proof. And yes the circumstantial evidence is so overwhelming that it would probably end up in a guilty verdict in any legitimate courtroom (many have been sentenced on far less circumstantial evidence) but it's still only circumstantial
I much prefer posters to tell us things in their own words rather than shunt us off to some longwinded link to do their talking for them.. I ask you the simple question again, who were the pilots if they weren't muslims?
So in other words, research isn't your thing. You'd rather just buy hearsay from anonymous posters that you like, reject anything you don't like, and accept it as fact and apply it as if you personally witnessed it, on a TV broadcast yet that doesn't exist. That doesn't sound very open minded to me, it sounds not only very closed minded but delusional as well. What's also very closed minded is that you refuse to acknowledge that any possibility exists that those 9/11 planes were piloted by anyone whose religion (or no religion) is other than Muslim. This is the 3rd time you asked me the same question and I already answered it. Is English not your primary language? Once again and for the last time. 9/11 was never legitimately investigated by any official entity. Therefore every conclusion by any of these political frauds masquerading as investigations is suspect and not to be taken as fact. As a result, no one, not you and not I, knows who or what piloted those airplanes (directly or remotely) that crashed on 9/11, except those who were involved.
We can trash the "remotely-piloted" theory quite easily mate, because passengers and flight attendants on board the planes put through calls to relatives saying hijackers were taking over, and voices were also picked up on the flight recorder, for example- Quote from net report:- At 26 seconds after 10, a passenger is heard shouting: "In the cockpit! If we don't, we'll die," followed shortly afterwards by another yelling "Roll it!" This is widely believed to have referred to an attempt to smash open the cockpit door with a service trolley. At 10.01, Jarrah [hijacker] repeats "Allah is the Greatest!" before asking another hijacker: "Is that it? Shall we put it down?" His ally replied: "Yes pull it down". Jarrah rolled the plane onto its back, with shouts of "Allah is the Greatest" continuing in the cockpit. The counter-attack could still be heard as the Flight 93 plunged downwards, crashing just after 10.03 into an empty field in Pennsylvania, 20 minutes' flight time from Washington. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...754395/911-Voices-from-the-doomed-planes.html
I read it thanks, it's not a "good book", it's a worthless piece of garbage based on a fraudulent "investigation". 25% of the footnotes used to support that rag comes from 3rd party accounts from detainee "confessions" who were mercilessly tortured. One such "confession" was signed by a detainee who wasn't allowed to read what he signed. The Senate Select Committee Report on Torture admitted that torture yielded "no useful intelligence". http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-fg-torture-report-20141210-story.html But it is a "good book" for people such as you since you believe it is.
I think I recall how it works now. The experts that did the entire investigation, hundreds or maybe thousands of them, got it wrong. But you got it right. I see.
But you don't check on the "experts" so you do not notice that the NIST never mentions the total amount of concrete in the Twin Towers in 10,000 pages even though they specify the total amount of steel three times. Curious omission for supposedly analyzing two building collapses! psik
You obviously don't. It doesn't sound like you know the first thing about the 9/11 Commission or their report. In the first place, it's not about me, I had nothing to do with it so you don't see anything as you claim, I'm just a poster here with an opinion, same as you. In the second place, there was no legitimate forensic criminal investigation into 9/11. The 9/11 Commission did not consist of experts, they were made up of political cronies, especially Phillip Zelikow, who wrote the outline of the 9/11 Commission Report before the Commission even got started and edited the final report. The Commissioners suggested that there be a permanent 9/11 Commission because obviously they were well aware the report was far from complete. Not to mention they publicly claimed they were lied to and deceived. I also had nothing to do with the Senate report on torture that obviously destroys 25% of the supporting footnotes in the 9/11 Commission Report. The NIST "investigation" into the collapse of the 3 towers was conducted by experts and ripped by other experts. The most significant factual technical details can be found in this thread. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/458597-nist-9-11-scam-exposed-all-its-glory.html You can either start at the first post or skip to this one for a basic summary: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=458597&page=5&p=1066314658#post1066314658 I had zero to do with NIST's 9/11 "investigation" as well. Do the research or don't, I don't care, I'm not here to convince you of anything. Just don't post BS claims about me, you have no clue who I am and I'm not the subject of this thread. It's still about 9/11 facts as opposed to theories.
Wait, if you read the full report, as well as the engineering reports on the two two towers, you then know there are people posting who say things I know are not true and suspect you also know them to be not true. I have done this gig perhaps with you earlier this year so don't plan to repeat the process forever. I told you that you got it right and you saw that as an insult. Do I accept your findings, not one bit. But I do not come here with pet conspiracy theories to tell you, do I?
Careful Jack, if you start editing peoples posts, they might start editing yours if you're still around and haven't been banned.. Now tell us who you think it is on the 9/11 cockpit voice recorders yelling "Allah is greatest", the munchkins from the Wizard of Oz?
The only findings I have to offer are the links I post in this forum, the contents are not mine as already explained. What you accept or don't is your business, it's not my concern. I do correct silly claims such as the one about seeing Muslims flying into buildings on 9/11 on TV. A claim like that (the one you agreed with) is patently false.
My name is Bob, not Jack or "mate". I don't have the capability to edit anyone's post. What I posted corrects your post for accuracy. The words substituting some of yours for accuracy purposes are in brackets to denote they're mine, not yours. No one can edit posts other than mods, as already explained. Why don't you tell "us" since you're the one who saw Muslims on TV. I wasn't there. Was it a reality TV series? - - - Updated - - - Yeah that's it Robert. You got it if it makes you comfortable. I don't care.
Will you explain the Muslims flying all the aircraft and what happened to their aircraft? For the moment, ignore the buildings, discuss the airplanes. I know the story and so do you. If not, we need to begin there.
I first became aware of this theory around 2002-3. Not quite sure when I read the first engineering study done. It was not done by NIST. It was an Engineering study that I forget the name of. They explained how the two towers collapsed. Now, if you try to do an autopsy on a human body, (bear with me) and the body is fresh, you can do it very well. Same with buildings. A new building can be carefully studied. But when the body is burned and essentially destroyed, the autopsy is extremely difficult. Engineers are not magicians. Still those who did the first study did so reasonably fast. They explained the building construction plus the reason it collapsed. Apparently. NIST took it's own time and it seems they got there late in the game. Now, we have known facts. 1. Towers did fall 2. There is actual film of both hit by two airliners. 3. Airliners carry jet fuel 4. Jet fuel can't burn hot enough to melt steel, but bending it is no problem when the steel heated carries extreme loads. Then there are the vanishing airliners. We know where they took off from. Investigations showed they left behind autos that had evidence in them used by the FBI forensically. The airplane manifest has names. Muslims names to be exact. Said Muslims trained so they could pilot such airplanes. Even though they flew smaller aircraft, principles of flight are the same. They did not have to do more than head at the buildings to hit them. They more than likely could not have landed them. As a pilot, it is far easier to take off than to land. They did not even have to take off. They guided the airliners. You can get some very good lessons how to do that using the YouTube presentations. As to this recent study, they picked up where the other guys stopped I suppose. I am aware that for virtually all major events, there are those who enjoy conspiracy tales. I am not making accusations against anyone. I don't know why you posted on this topic. By the way, since I have been posting, this was talked about and in great detail.
So again by your "logic" nobody has ever actually seen a human land a 757, 767, 777, DC10, Space Shuttle, Concorde, etc... unless they were in the cockpit with them since the pilots at the controls are inside of a plane.
The airliner that hit the Pentagon was observed as it crashed by plenty of people. And I can show him video of the two airplanes hitting both the towers in NY City. What is going on now is a classic snow job. We need to find out if he is done. Has he forgot any of his evidence. i have seen this show before.
