9/11 questions and answers

Discussion in '9/11' started by RtWngaFraud, Jul 13, 2011.

  1. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great new book with a lot of common questions that the shills try and refute continually (unsuccessfully as usual).
    Looks like the truth is becoming more and more widely recognized despite the propaganda attempts and years of disinformation attempts in forums like this one.
    Smoke or fire? You decide for yourself folks. Discover the truth and say something. Spread the word.
    Cheers.

    http://911truthnews.com/questions-and-answers-with-kevin-fenton/
     
  2. candycorn

    candycorn New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,633
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I got as far as this:

    "Author: Jon Gold"

    No need to read further.
     
  3. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    6,953
    Likes Received:
    1,289
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ha,

    2 of the 3 reviews for the book on Amazon are from truthers who disagree with the book's conclusions.

    Looks like the truth movement is becoming more and more confused.
     
  4. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,631
    Likes Received:
    2,500
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Really?

    You mean like all of your talking points, your assertions, claims and questions?

    They have all been savagely refuted and debunked you have in fact never been accurate or correct once on these threads and everyone knows it including you.

    SO this new book has something you have not presented for debunking here?

    " meet the new boss same as"

    You only go in circles and repeat what has been proven wrong.

    Can't wait for something new
     
  5. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    6,953
    Likes Received:
    1,289
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The title of the first review is:

    Not Genuine 9/11 Skepticism - Caveat Lector!,

    The second is:

    Agree with RT; This book does not get to the real full truth

    So what's the truth, RWF? Are the two reviewers disinfo agents, or is the book disinfo? Since you posted the book as being recognition of the truth, perhaps Kameelyun and RT are paid shills?
     
  6. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The author shows a distinct lack of veracity.
     
  7. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Ahh yes....the honest, open minded skeptic..with no other objective than to find the truth. Low threshold for all that is "official". I understand. To the contrary?? The highest scrutiny of course!! LOL Priceless!
     
  8. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    6,953
    Likes Received:
    1,289
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Speaking of scrutiny, you didn't answer my question.

    Which narrative is correct? Which narrative is true? Is it the narrative in the book, or the narrative of the majority of the truthers that reviewed a book they didn't even read...
     
  9. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Have you read this 'great new book'?
     
  10. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    6,953
    Likes Received:
    1,289
    Trophy Points:
    113
    At least 2 out of 3 truthers that haven't read it think the book is not genuine 9/11 skepticism.
     
  11. BullsLawDan

    BullsLawDan New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is what happens with these bogus conspiracy theory groups. Eventually, they eat each other alive.

    Laser beams from space? Controlled demolition? Remote control planes? False flag?

    Even they can't decide. And look at them here... None of them will come out with their theory, or post a thread espousing what they think happened, because they're so afraid the other ones will disagree.
     
  12. candycorn

    candycorn New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,633
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Afraid? Yes.

    Not of each other. They are afraid of us; we don't change our stories.

    If they are this afraid of people in the virtual world...can you imagine real life?
     
  13. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ridicule. Insult. Avoid. Page 37.
     
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Of the 'truther' handbook.
     
  15. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Truther manuals don't exist. Only advocates strictly bound to the "official" BS story, must follow a strict script. But you know that...
     
  16. BullsLawDan

    BullsLawDan New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Umm... In your OP, you are promoting a "truther manual."

    And your personal attacks continue. Because you have no evidence with which to dispute the generally accepted account. None. If you had any, you'd cite it, instead of making wildly baseless, insane, immature, ridiculous, false accusations against anyone who disagrees with you.

    This is now my standard response for your wildly baseless, insane, immature, ridiculous, false accusations.
     
  17. NAB

    NAB Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,821
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    38

    No, you don't have manuals, you have Youtube vids and moronic blogs.
     
  18. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The OP says differently.
     
  19. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You changed your story.. You went from claiming the commission report is 100% accurate and bulletproof from cover to cover, and didn't contain any mistakes, to the commission report only being right about the fact that some planes were crashed and the mistakes it has aren't "major" enough for you.
     
  20. candycorn

    candycorn New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,633
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I've said about 500 times "right on all of the major points." It would require a person with a seriously bizarre personality flaw to hone in on the few times I didn't finish the though in writing. Which explains quite a bit actually.

    LOL.

    The 9/11 Commission Report remains 100% bulletproof on all of the major points. The first printings were on Kevlar I believe. Bull-et-Proof!
     
  21. BullsLawDan

    BullsLawDan New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And in your mind that's exactly the same as thinking at one point WTC was destroyed with explosives, then later thinking it was orbiting space laser beams, then later thinking it was planes being piloted remotely. Yup, exactly the same.
     
  22. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's really moot because you don't think the plotting and financing of the attacks and who was behind them are "major points"...

    You aren't willing to stand behind the whole report.. Only a COUPLE of MINOR points which you claim are the ONLY major points.. In other words, it's you cherrypicking out the easy stuff from it to defend.

    EVEN THAT I proved you wrong as they can't be 100% when they've made an error.. If you take an exam and you miss a question did you get 100% on the exam?

    You only brought in the "major points" copout caveat relatively recently.. Long before then you just said it was perfect top to bottom..

    I can see why you want to weasle out of that though and revise history; demonstration of you flip flopping shows you the hypocrite when you whine about others doing it and do it yourself.. So go on believing you never made claims which you clearly did.
     
  23. happy fun dude

    happy fun dude New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2010
    Messages:
    10,501
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who has done that?
     
  24. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In general or just the 'truthers' on this board?
     
  25. BullsLawDan

    BullsLawDan New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,724
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you think the attacks (the physical attacks themselves) happened as listed in the 9/11 report... The buildings fell because they were hit by planes, AA77 hit the Pentagon, and Flight 93 was crashed when the passengers attempted to retake the plane?

    Your questions are with regard to Al-Queda being the force behind it, versus someone else?
     

Share This Page