The FBI claims bombs were used on 9/11

Discussion in '9/11' started by RtWngaFraud, May 3, 2012.

  1. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

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


    I found an interesting take on Mr. Mark Roberts (the SOURCE of your link) here:
    http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/august2008/070808Roberts.htm

    The article suggests Mr. Roberts may be a bit "dishonest". Who would have guessed?
     
  2. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I thought you were going with direct responses. Why are you changing the subject and trying to obfuscate the topic?

    Respectfully, Can you address the points brought up in the link?
     
  3. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Explosions. Especially the claims of explosions in the lower levels.
     
  4. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    When was the first debris first shipped outside of the United States? Gimme a date here, man. And how long did it take those agencies/organizations to finish their investigations and/or compile a report to conclude that there was 'no explosives used'?
     
  5. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
  6. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Mid-January 2002 is the earliest report I found.
     
  7. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    97,282
    Likes Received:
    27,224
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So that means an investigation into aliens means aliens exist. Check.
     
  8. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This is one of the major differences between truthers and.... well, everyone else. Truthers believe the theories are the theories and if they change it is a sign of weakness. Everyone else believes that you start with a theory and change the theory as evidence presents itself that you end up at the truth, not where you started from because you are too weak to change. The fact the official story has changed as new information became available makes it MORE credible, not less even if truthers believe differently. It means that they are not trying to fit the evidence to the theory as truthers claim and are instead fitting the theory to the evidence. You should try it sometime.
     
  9. Patriot911

    Patriot911 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    9,312
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Explosions do not automatically mean explosives no matter how much the truthers claim otherwise. Many witnesses, including the one who got burned, claim the "explosion" was the sound of the freight elevator letting go and slamming into the basement. Fuel from the crash came down the elevator shafts and burned people. High explosives don't burn people. They will make you go deaf or, if close enough rupture vital organs, but they won't burn you. The work is done through a high pressure wave, not heat.

    Please present a witness who saw a bomb, not heard an explosion.
     
  10. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0


    How has it changed
     
  11. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So was the FBI investigating because of the claims of explosions?
     
  12. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    See post 18 of this thread where this question has already been answered.
     
  13. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And all of it was searched and screened and tagged and processed and photographed and logged and 'looked at underneath a microscope'?

    And these logs are where?
     
  14. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, I saw that, thanks.
     
  15. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Most likely with the myriad of agencies that did the investigating.

    Did you take look at the link I provided?
     
  16. DDave

    DDave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,002
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    48
    So you think the investigation was not done properly because no evidence was found that fits with your view of what happened?

    If they were made available to you would you believe them?

    Skepticism is good but do some research and reading on your own. There are TONS of websites out there that offer information from both sides. Read ALL of it with an open mind and decide which is more credible.

    Another misleading thread title from RWF based on a misleading, if not downright LYING blog.

    It should read "The FBI Suspected Bombs Were Used on 9/11".
     
  17. 10aces

    10aces New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No...they did not detonate.
     
  18. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So planes are NOT considered bombs? Now I'm getting even more confused as this differs greatly from what someone that supports the "official" version of events says here. Can someone please clarify?
     
  19. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Can you please respond to my post?
     
  20. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Certainly...my apologies.. Well, I suppose, like yourself, I tend to find what I consider to be "not credible" information websites that disagree with my point of view well....not credible. All I had to do was google the source of your link (the source...as you always insist on) and it came up with 'propaganda" "lies", and the like. Honestly...I didn't get any further than that. You have your response.
     
  21. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So you have no direct evidence to show the links within not credible?
     
  22. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2011
    Messages:
    20,420
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have pretty much the same evidence that you offer as proof of credibility for your links.
     
  23. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then kindly source it, as I do.
     
  24. RtWngaFraud

    RtWngaFraud Banned

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

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't tirade.

    I encourage everyone to check the link RWF has posted. It discredits his claims in the first few paragraphs. Make sure to follow the source.

    You really should read what you link to, sometimes.
     

Share This Page