Thread: The FBI claims bombs were used on 9/11

Let's narrow in on this whole bomb/no bomb point. The FBI said there were bombs.

Question. Was the FBI WRONG?


http://georgewashington2.blogspot.co...ved-bombs.html

What can you tell me about E.P. Heidner ?
Does anybody know who exactly he is ?
What are the details of anything he has written ?
I have just read one or two things which rank as the most unexpected finds I have ever found on the Internet .
Is the original research of , Eastman ,Flocco , Durham and Schwarz worth tracking down , or does Heidner embrace all of their research in his work?

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

Let's narrow in on this whole bomb/no bomb point. The FBI said there were bombs.

Question. Was the FBI WRONG?


http://georgewashington2.blogspot.co...ved-bombs.html

The government loves their acronyms...in this case it was convenient for them to use 'bombing investigation'.....doesn't mean they neccessarily thought there were bombs

The linked article proves that the FBI investigated for bombs, which is true. The investigation was thorough and exhaustive.

No evidence was found, therefore no bombs were used. The thread title is misleading. The FBI never claimed bombs were used.

Originally Posted by LoneStrSt8

The government loves their acronyms...in this case it was convenient for them to use 'bombing investigation'.....doesn't mean they neccessarily thought there were bombs

I see.....so when the FBI says "bomb", they don't really mean "bomb". I didn't realize that. Perhaps we're getting somewhere now. Thanks!

Originally Posted by Hannibal

The linked article proves that the FBI investigated for bombs, which is true. The investigation was thorough and exhaustive.

No evidence was found, therefore no bombs were used. The thread title is misleading. The FBI never claimed bombs were used.

I see...so, this:

Following the massive terrorist attacks against New York and Washington, the FBI dedicated 7,000 of its 11,000 Special Agents and thousands of FBI support personnel to the PENTTBOM investigation. "PENTTBOM" is short for Pentagon, Twin Towers Bombing.

...means something other than bomb. Okay. See, this is all so very confusing. Bombs don't really mean bombs. Very confusing.

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

I see.....so when the FBI says "bomb", they don't really mean "bomb". I didn't realize that. Perhaps we're getting somewhere now. Thanks!

What is a bomb?

An explosive weapon detonated by impact, proximity to an object, a timing mechanism, or other means

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/bomb#ixzz1tp0onGoD

So, a plane flown into a building doesn't fit the definition of bomb how? Anything can be used as a weapon based on intent. Did the hijackers decide to use the planes as weapons? Yes. Did the planes detonate on impact? Yes. So how is a plane not a bomb when used as a weapon?

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

I see...so, this:

Following the massive terrorist attacks against New York and Washington, the FBI dedicated 7,000 of its 11,000 Special Agents and thousands of FBI support personnel to the PENTTBOM investigation. "PENTTBOM" is short for Pentagon, Twin Towers Bombing.

...means something other than bomb. Okay. See, this is all so very confusing. Bombs don't really mean bombs. Very confusing.

I didn't say that 'bomb' doesn't mean 'bomb'. You are being either obtuse or disrespectful.

What is the word immediately following 'bomb'? It's 'Investigation". As stated in the article, the FBI investigated the possibility of bombs.

Originally Posted by Patriot911

What is a bomb?

An explosive weapon detonated by impact, proximity to an object, a timing mechanism, or other means

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/bomb#ixzz1tp0onGoD

So, a plane flown into a building doesn't fit the definition of bomb how? Anything can be used as a weapon based on intent. Did the hijackers decide to use the planes as weapons? Yes. Did the planes detonate on impact? Yes. So how is a plane not a bomb when used as a weapon?

So....plane mean bombs and bombs mean planes. The terms are to be used interchangably, is that correct? So...all those explosions the fireman in the video heard, were actually planes. I'm trying to understand why a bomb isn't a bomb, and a plane is a bomb instead.

The English language differentiates between the word plane and bomb fairly clearly I thought. Is this another one of those "only on 9/11" rules we're supposed to use?

Originally Posted by Hannibal

I didn't say that 'bomb' doesn't mean 'bomb'. You are being either obtuse or disrespectful.

What is the word immediately following 'bomb'? It's 'Investigation". As stated in the article, the FBI investigated the possibility of bombs.

That's only PART of what the article said sir.