LOL, your still believing a hoax 17 years after it was presented shows your bullshit detector was never calibrated. You were scammed again. Caveat Emptor.
Do you see any evidence here? http://www.politicalforum.com/index...orted-9-11-terrorists.456423/#post-1066183060
He only sees what he wants to see, the OCT. All other evidence that questions or contradicts it is "troofer" material and all experts who contradict it are "troofer cranks", especially if they have a white beard and they're tenured professors.
your first sentence "there were no hijackers" ... show me the evidence of no hijackers ... there is plenty of evidence for hijackers ... can you please summarize in your own words rather than your constant spamming of links ...
No one can prove a negative and the burden of proof rests with the claimant at all times (the US government in this case). There is highly questionable and often challenged "evidence" that has been used by the US government to support the OCT. There is NO incontrovertible proof of any kind.
This is a matter of semantics. The accurate statement is that onboard the aircraft that struck the towers, there were no hijackers. If you think there were, please provide some evidence for it. In the beginning, there was controversy in Boston, including in the news, over just which gate one or the other of the "hijacked airplanes" had departed from. Nobody knows, and you can't prove that there were hijackers. You can't even prove which airplane was used. There are no records because it was an inside job.
you are seriously eluded when it comes to burden of proof ... you would have had to been in Boston, DC, Shanksville, NYC, at all the airports, in the planes, inside the buildings and in Bush's inner circle to satisfy your burden of proof ... get ****ing real Boob ... that's a very bold statement E ... PROOF??? ... quit hiding behind your juvenile psychology ... back your **** up for once ...
No Shiner, perhaps you are. It is universally accepted that the burden of proof ALWAYS rests with the claimant for good reason. It makes no sense that any other person/entity must prove a claimant's claim true. Otherwise one can just claim there is a Santa Claus and a Tooth Fairy and the claimant has no obligation to prove it. Otherwise an accused is guilty merely by accusation and due process is never required. If the claimant's claim cannot be satisfied as true, no matter what it is and what must satisfy it, then it is merely an unproven claim and not necessarily true and can only be accepted as true on faith. Furthermore, if it is based on fraud or it can be contradicted by fact, logic and/or science then it must be taken as false unless and until proven otherwise. Your assertion is nonsensical. No one has to be in all those places to prove the official claim is true. However, appropriate incontrovertible evidence must be presented to support the claim, whatever that requires, otherwise it's a baseless claim. I am real Shiner, changing my name in order to insult is just your childish attempt to try to support your fallacies. It seems to me you're the one who isn't operating on any level that resembles reality. Your post indicates that you just believe the OCT on faith, nothing more. And that's far from reality given the claimant's lengthy history of pathological lies.
"There were no hijackers" just as immaculate drug conception trafficking Federal Lynching KKK churchstate of hate cops dictating there were no Arab terrorists that threatened POTUS & to nuke Temple Mount before 9/11; who in all probability after flight school records were released the very same hijack terrorists which Islam bestowed 40 virgins & a place in Valhalla as martyrs upon.
Saudi Arabia has acknowledged for the first time the death of Jamal Khashoggi at its consulate in Istanbul, with Saudi state-run media reporting the missing journalist had died as a result of a violent "fistfight." Probably being just as boot-licky as with Rehnquist's immaculate drug conception for the burning Bush's lynching enforcement emulating Kristallnacht tactics in their attempting to baptize eyes of one of Ike's WW II Pentagon staff sergeants which in all probability resulted in America's 9/11 holy costs.
No lad, the burden is on you. It is YOU who claim AA11 struck the North Tower and that it contained passengers and crew. You claim the same for UA175 hit the South Tower. Prove it dude.
Technically if you're going to claim there were no hijackers, the burden of proof is on you since you're the claimant. The OCT claims there were hijackers and the burden of proof is on the US government to prove it's true. Shiner claims the OCT is correct so the burden of proof is on him to back up his claim. All he can do however is parrot the OCT, he has nothing else. So it's like John saying there's a Santa Claus and Dave says there's a Santa Claus because John said so. It's one thing to make a claim but it's another to say "I don't believe there were any hijackers", that would be an opinion, not a claim. I personally don't believe there were any hijackers either. The OCT makes no sense to me, none of it. The 3 planes that hit the towers and the Pentagon found their targets with uncanny precision and made such incredibly sophisticated maneuvers without the aid of ground control, allegedly piloted by non-pilots (how I would describe these alleged OCT characters) at speeds well over VMO that it defies common sense that they were capable of performing all that (all 3 no less). Furthermore, one of these hit the friggin Pentagon! wall totally unmolested. None of this makes any sense. And finally, all the alleged "proof" the US government has provided not only amounts to squat but virtually all of it is highly suspect and strongly disputed. And to make matters worse, they've denied many FOIA requests for additional evidence on illegitimate grounds. The same is true with the controlled demolition claims of the 3 towers on 9/11. I'm certain in my heart that all 3 buildings were control demolished but that is strictly my opinion based on everything I know. So I'm not going to claim they were control demolished but I am going to say I strongly believe they were control demolished and do not believe in the least that natural forces caused their total destruction in a matter of seconds. And I know based on the history that the US government has provided only bogus evidence and lack of evidence and used pseudoscience to try to prove their OCT claim.
As a metaphor, Shiner is claiming the Emperor's Clothes are spectacular. I am claiming I cannot see the Emperor's Clothes. As a fact, he is claiming the cell phone calls made from these airplanes were true and accurate. I am claiming the science and physics of cell phones were impossible. He is claiming the NIST explanation to be true and accurate, I'm saying nonsense. By the rules of logic, if a theory is comprised of several elements, A,B and C, if any one of those elements is false, the entire theory fails.
I'm not sure that's true because he has called them "hacks". But he does believe all 3 buildings collapsed naturally in a matter of seconds as a result of planes, damage, fire (fire alone for WTC7) and gravitational forces yet he never explains how he believes that's possible if the NIST explanation is not true. Personally I think he's confused in his own mind.
Why are avoiding the question, of the size of the tunnels connecting the buildings. someone as "Informed" as you should have all that information on the top of his head. You do this a lot. You have some stupid accusation, and ignore all other facts.
Regarding evidence that there were no passengers or hijackers: I'd like to hear what the pro-official version posters think about the issue of the pod under the plane that hit the North Tower, the flash that was seen and the witnesses who said the plane didn't look like a passenger plane. Was the 9/11 Attack the 2001 Version of "Operation Northwoods"? Start watching this at the 36:55 time mark. 9/11 In Plane Site - Directors Cut
wow! you're first paragraph is coherent ... although I have to admit that I love your style ... reminds me of Chuck Palahniuk ... everything was faked right E? ... those flights allegedly took off and disappeared with all the passengers crew but the hijackers listed on the fake manifest never boarded the plane ... then some drones came out of nowhere and hit the towers ... am I following your logic correctly? ... but let's move on ... did these drone have radar jamming or some type of stealth capabilities or was ATC part of the "plan" ... the same applies to the Pentagon and Shanksville ... you have repeatedly claimed many times that these flights did not terminate as per the official account of 9/11/01 ... the burden of proof has clearly shifted to you ... you have entered the rabbit hole ... but you do so without any conviction ... your parsing of words is very clever ... you have no commitment ... metaphors are very tired unless they are used properly ... I have never addressed here the phone calls ... why lie E? ... I have never commented on the subject because I am not fluent in the technology of the day ... don't accuse me like that ... dishonesty is a bad trait .. Once again, I have never stated that the NIST report is true and accurate ... I have questioned many aspects here on the forums regarding the NIST report ... please stop being a lying fraud ... you're theories are flat out from Planet 9 ... very bad science fiction ...
Why are both of you avoiding the question, of the size of the tunnels connecting the buildings. someone as "Informed" as you should have all that information on the top of his head. You do this a lot. You have some stupid accusation, and ignore all other facts.
Same BS, over and over. Hanji was a commercial pilot, you know this and repeated the same thing proven wrong. they steered already airborne aircraft into visible targets. easy to do, you know this, and keep repeating the same BS. And ground control is for parking and taxing, you don't use it in the air
How burden of proof convenient applying use of transgressive fiction in lynching enforcement of the national religion churchstate diatribe tautology for that 9/11 second coming Islam Christiananality pedophilia mentality business, which seems so similar to Rehnquist's immaculate drug conception super ego to ensure some Federal Lynching KKK churchstate of hate cops that baptize eyes by urinations to protect & serve Arab terrorists which threatened POTUS & to nuke Temple Mount enacted for WW II Kristallnacht resulting in the Holocaust where America's holy costs of 9/11 are dressed up as ChristHitler "serve the Pope or die" "death to the infidels" "man is God" instead of the SS.
That's a lot of meaningless gibberish Shiner. I believe my words are quite clear. My "commitment" has been very obvious from all my posts on the subject. But since you asked (or didn't) these are only some of the major issues I'm committed to. 1. To expose elements within the US government for malicious criminal fraud, including publishing the OCT as fact and using it as pretext to commit genocide/war crimes and other crimes against humanity. 2. And by extension to make it very clear that no legitimate official investigation into 9/11 was ever conducted by the US government. 3. And by further extension, to make it clear that a legitimate forensic criminal investigation into 9/11 (ALL events of the day and aspects) is absolutely necessary (it always was), including a thorough investigation of those responsible at NIST and the 9/11 Commission for their failure to properly perform their mandated tasks and potential perpetration of criminal fraud. This should also include a thorough investigation of the Bush administration members (ALL of them), Pentagon, CIA and FBI officials (among others) responsible for all activities surrounding 9/11, especially for their failure to do anything to prevent 9/11 despite numerous intelligence warnings and for their failure to do anything to try to stop it the moment they knew it was under way. There should also be an investigation into the 12 war games deliberately scheduled on 9/11. Is that the "rabbit hole", "non-conviction" and "no commitment" you're referring to Shiner?
Shine A person as deeply into denial of facts as you are will NEVER understand logic, whether mine or someone else's. A person so deeply into denial rejects logic, as you do. Being unable to phrase and intelligent question is a giveaway. Offering silly questions as you have done in your post #367 is typical of one that cannot be taken seriously.
Here is something I posted in August of 2009: I recently but somewhat accidentally ran across something interesting in the NCSTAR report. On the matter of mass distribution of the towers the NIST says this: http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1-5D Ceilings.pdf page 74 Since people don't just accidentally decide how much steel and concrete to put on every level of a 1360 foot building that can withstand 100+ mph winds the above statement is not surprising. The peculiar thing is that this was not discussed A LOT in preparing to analyze the event back in 2001. I don't understand why they couldn't have had that info on the building by fall 2003 though and I certainly don't understand why we don't have it now. WTF I love the jargon they have to come with for these kind of reports, " Single Impulse Excitations". You have to stop and think, "What the hell does that mean?" Oh. it was hit real hard one time and started vibrating. DUH! 500 mph airliners do that, but only once. The south tower moved 12 inches at the 70th floor which was 130 feet below the impact at the 81st floor. The tower oscillated for FOUR MINUTES. http://stj911.org/jones/Jones_Replyto_Reynolds_Wood.html So that Single Pulse Excitation was caused by a lot of kinetic energy from the plane and the amount of energy which produced structural damage cannot be computed from the total energy of the aircraft without calculating how much went to producing this behavior in the building and that requires reasonably accurate distribution of steel and concrete information. But where does the NIST show that data and do those calculation? I have searched the NCSTAR for more statements containing "weight distribution". "mass distribution", "distribution of weight" and "distribution of mass" but that "2.4.3 Single Impulse Excitations" is the only instance that clearly stated the relevance of the vertical distribution of mass to analyzing the impact. My impact demonstration was intended to make the importance of that information obvious. [changed video since I hadn't made that one in 2009] NIST NCSTAR 1-2 http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-2.pdf Baseline Structural Performance and Aircraft Impact Damage Analysis of the World Trade Center Towers pdf page 143 The bottom line is that the Twin Tower collapses are scientifically unresolved. That is ridiculous after SEVENTEEN YEARS. Dozens of engineering schools should have produced physical and virtual models by now if airliner impacts and fires could have brought the buildings down.
Since it's far beyond better never than late reality vs myth punctuation in Rehnquist's immaculate drug conception leading Americans to mass death for Federal Lynching KKK churchstate cops which attempted to baptize eyes by urinations to protect & serve Arab terrorists that threatened POTUS & to nuke Temple Mount before 9/11; just as WW II Nazi Germans loading railroad cars with those designated during Kristallnacht in promising a much better life as their guide.
