I would love to see YOUR evidence that they did. Christ, there was not even an airliner at Shanksville or the Pentagon. You claim there was rather like George Bush claimed there were WMD in Iraq. Bovine fecal matter is not proof of anything except the gullibility of the masses.
well ... let's see ... 19 named Arabs were on the original passenger manifests ... 3 different flight attendants contacted ATC reporting hijackings and killings onboard the planes ... so that's all fake right? ... airliners certainly crashed into the Pentagon and in Penn ... ****tons of evidence shows this ... I don't understand this fantasy world you live in ... how do you even function in this paranoid realm you are in? ...
Once again I ask, what is your burden of proof? ... FFS man, 19 Arabs hijacked 4 planes and crashed them ... the evidence is overwhelming ... what is wrong with your world that you cannot see this? ... why not just start another rant about effing serial numbers? ...
There are no facts about the alleged hijackings and therefore there’s nothing to “understand” except to understand that there are no facts about the alleged hijackings. Understand? No? Who cares?
Wikipedia is great for the herd mentality, for the gullible amongst us. I do not fall into either category.
This isn't about me Shiner. You keep trying to make it about me and/or your demons ("troofers"), whatever those are supposed to be. Just like the official JFK assassination story, the official 9/11 story has been factually proven to be filled with lies, distortions and impossible stories, not to mention extreme over-classification, otherwise known as a massive coverup. So for me the story about the alleged hijackers is nothing more than an official myth unless and until proven otherwise, not by the US government but by a legitimate unbiased investigation. Wiki only parrots the official story(ies) when it comes to JFK and 9/11, it is not a valid source of information because Wiki has never done the investigation. I live on this planet and the history of this planet is that all governments lie and tend to tyranny. You probably didn't pay attention in your grade school history class but I did and those facts were taught beginning in elementary school. I also learned a lot more from the history of my family ("arbeit macht frei"). If you read the Declaration of Independence, our founding document, it is also written in black and white (see my signature). The framers also understood all too well all about tyranny and that's why they inserted Article II Section 4 into the Constitution. And you can see because we are living it today that even that doesn't work. "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." - Thomas Jefferson So I don't believe one word of what this government claims about 9/11 because I'm not that gullible and I have learned quite a bit in over 7 decades of my existence. And one has to be incredibly gullible to believe anything that comes from a pathological lying entity, especially given not only a mountain of evidence that proves the story is not reality but even admits it's loaded with lies. “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” - Joseph Goebbels So now what? Back to your usual immature insults? It seems to be the only thing you know best. I've tried often to have a serious discussion with you but I doubt you're capable so I don't expect anything reasonable from you in response.
Independent thinking Shine, you should try it sometime. I read and have read many sources, and I do my own thinking.
more fluff from Bob ... I don't take people seriously that ignore facts and believe somohow that 3 buildings were rigged for CD on 9/11 ... not a shred of evidence to support this which is why I hold people like you in contempt ... your hatred of the government has blinded you to reality ... now if you want to talk about intelligence failures and cover ups, I'm willing to be more "mature" ,,, but i will continue to insult crack pot theories that have no basis in realty ...
Then you don't take yourself seriously because that's all you do. You're only supporting the point that it's you who ignores the facts. There is overwhelming evidence that all 3 buildings were CD'd and no evidence that they were completely destroyed by planes/damage/fire or fire alone. The evidence has been characterized in legal terms as dispositive. Despite that the vast majority of physical evidence was deliberately destroyed, corroborating eyewitness claims and science has proven that the fire hypothesis is impossible and that only leaves one other possibility. But it's ok, please continue to believe in fairy tales and ignore science and evidence, I'm ok with that, I don't care. Ask me if I care. Your faith in government has blinded you to reality. That's quite an admission of your immaturity. I've posted an incredible amount of evidence with respect to "intelligence failures" and "coverups". Your response has always been defensive of both. Such as the OCT?
For a person in denial, providing sources is a waste of time. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink. You can lead a man to knowledge by way of links, but you cannot make him think. When the eyes are wide shut, there is nothing that can be done.
please stop with your esoteric philosophical nonsense ... I called you out on your lies in the Sandy Hook thread and you disappeared ... I provide sources and you provide bullshit ...
Both Sandy Hook and the JFK, RFK and MLK official narratives all fail upon close scrutiny. You buy into official narratives without a moment's hesitation. I am very much the opposite. Repeating false statements as you do here does not make them become true.
I haven't done much research into the JFK issue but I just came across this video of a witness who disputes the official story. This thread seemed like a good place to post it. Railroad Supervisor Sam Holland - Witness to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy
Well color me surprised. Perhaps you think that account is news of some sort? In your preliminary follow up, as I'm sure you did (meh!), did you notice the glaring inconsistency of there being 4 shots? Or maybe that the acoustics of rifle shots are incredibly complicated? Frontiers | Why Did the Earwitnesses to the John F. Kennedy Assassination Not Agree About the Location of the Gunman? (frontiersin.org) "The HSCA report (House Select Committee on Assassinations, 1979) received world-wide attention because at the last minute it was rewritten around a conclusion of there having been four gunshots, not the three mentioned in the Warren Report (Bugliosi, 2007a, p. 380; Bugliosi, 2007b, p. 153+). For various reasons, four shots meant two shooters, exactly what many conspiracy theorists had been arguing for years. As explained in Supplementary Material (McFadden, 2021), that conclusion was shown to be unquestionably erroneous within months of the publication of the HSCA report, but unfortunately the bell could not be unrung, and the HSCA report has contributed to the widespread belief that the Warren Report was wrong." I like that phrase "the bell that could not be unrung". Roughly translated it means that no amount of evidence or logic can convince a conspiracy theorist that they've got it wrong. No matter what. That link above and this below contains numerous accounts and analyses about the way rifle shots present. READ ALL OF THIS! Frontiers | Why Did the Earwitnesses to the John F. Kennedy Assassination Not Agree About the Location of the Gunman? (frontiersin.org) "Estimates are that somewhere between 500 and 700 people were in Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination. Many were employed nearby and came out during their lunch hour to watch the motorcade pass by. Most of the spectators were arrayed along Houston Street, with fewer on the sidewalk and grass on either side of Elm Street. " By contrast, there was good agreement about the number of shots heard, with 79% of the 172 people who answered that question saying 3 shots."
If they were returning fire it would not be accidental. they fired no rounds accidental or otherwise and did not stop
Wrong It is the conspiracay theories which fall to pieces under the slightest scrutiny. You are the one here repeating false statements The evieence is CRUSHING that Oswald shot JFK and ALL of the conspiracy theories have been DISPROVEN