Evidence thread

[Patriot911]

So you believe then that both items of evidence I have questioned are in fact legitimate?

I have no reason to believe they are faked. The passport was not the only item retrieved from the planes before the collapse. Can you show me evidence that shows the passport was planted evidence? Do you have an explanation why the government would fake something so unlikely? I've never understood the mindset that allows someone to believe the government (a proven cluster(*)(*)(*)(*) of an organization if there ever was one) could so perfectly execute a 9/11 false flag and then perfectly cover it up, and then do something so retarded and amateurish as planting a passport. Which is it? Is the government extremely capable or is the government extremely incompetent?

[Patriot911]

And you never said what the story was on the DL. One got past? Anyway, I would like to hear your voice say, "I believe the DL evidence is legit," rather than you simply writing it out here. PM me please.

The DL wasn't even linked to any of the hijackers. I am not sure why they even presented that as evidence other than to present yet one more piece of evidence showing someone from Saudi Arabia was there on 9/11.

So what would hearing my voice change? Does it somehow add legitimacy to what I write?

[Jango]

I want to hear the sureness. Besides, we could address some of our communication problems.

[RtWngaFraud]

I have no reason to believe they are faked. The passport was not the only item retrieved from the planes before the collapse. Can you show me evidence that shows the passport was planted evidence? Do you have an explanation why the government would fake something so unlikely? I've never understood the mindset that allows someone to believe the government (a proven cluster(*)(*)(*)(*) of an organization if there ever was one) could so perfectly execute a 9/11 false flag and then perfectly cover it up, and then do something so retarded and amateurish as planting a passport. Which is it? Is the government extremely capable or is the government extremely incompetent?

You have no reason to doubt anything "official", nor would you ever. That's call a closed mind, paid allegiance to an objective, or something. Certainly not objectivity.

[Patriot911]

You have no reason to doubt anything "official", nor would you ever. That's call a closed mind, paid allegiance to an objective, or something. Certainly not objectivity.

This coming from someone who thinks the lets roll forums are fair balanced and truthful!! Do you have evidence that isn't opinion that would refute the evidence? Of course you don't. If you had any evidence at all that your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories were true you would be flaunting it all over the place. Instead you have to troll and pretend you have evidence. Is it called objectivity when you have to make (*)(*)(*)(*) up to make your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) truther theories plausible? Is it called objectivity when you kiss up to the lets roll forums because you can't win a debate on these forums even though you don't actually agree with the positions over at lets roll?

Which is more objective. Looking at all the evidence and letting the evidence speak for itself? Or denying any and all evidence that proves your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories are crap and then claiming you have mythical evidence you can never quite remember? Of course, this is a rhetorical question. We both know the answer.

[RtWngaFraud]

This coming from someone who thinks the lets roll forums are fair balanced and truthful!! Do you have evidence that isn't opinion that would refute the evidence? Of course you don't. If you had any evidence at all that your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories were true you would be flaunting it all over the place. Instead you have to troll and pretend you have evidence. Is it called objectivity when you have to make (*)(*)(*)(*) up to make your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) truther theories plausible? Is it called objectivity when you kiss up to the lets roll forums because you can't win a debate on these forums even though you don't actually agree with the positions over at lets roll?

Which is more objective. Looking at all the evidence and letting the evidence speak for itself? Or denying any and all evidence that proves your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories are crap and then claiming you have mythical evidence you can never quite remember? Of course, this is a rhetorical question. We both know the answer.

Been there....done that. Shills overran it some time ago and haven't permitted discussion of actual evidence of anything except their BS version of cave dwelling magic men since.

[Patriot911]

Been there....done that. Shills overran it some time ago and haven't permitted discussion of actual evidence of anything except their BS version of cave dwelling magic men since.

Yet despite your claims to the contrary, you can't actually point out a single piece of real evidence. Your lies are becomming so obvious to anyone and everyone no matter how dense or willing they are to believe your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories.

[RtWngaFraud]

This coming from someone who thinks the lets roll forums are fair balanced and truthful!! Do you have evidence that isn't opinion that would refute the evidence? Of course you don't. If you had any evidence at all that your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories were true you would be flaunting it all over the place. Instead you have to troll and pretend you have evidence. Is it called objectivity when you have to make (*)(*)(*)(*) up to make your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) truther theories plausible? Is it called objectivity when you kiss up to the lets roll forums because you can't win a debate on these forums even though you don't actually agree with the positions over at lets roll?

Which is more objective. Looking at all the evidence and letting the evidence speak for itself? Or denying any and all evidence that proves your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) theories are crap and then claiming you have mythical evidence you can never quite remember? Of course, this is a rhetorical question. We both know the answer.

Been there....done that. Shills overran it some time ago and haven't permitted discussion of actual evidence of anything except their BS version of cave dwelling magic men since.

[Hannibal]

Been there....done that. Shills overran it some time ago and haven't permitted discussion of actual evidence of anything except their BS version of cave dwelling magic men since.

Name calling and racism. Sounds like a 'truther'.

[NAB]

Shills are in a constant battle with shrills.