[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Siblings Outraged by Their Brother's Fatal Shooting Dismiss the Fact That He was an Armed Robber - "Oh Well!"

U.S. Mint to redesign gold and silver American Eagles, implement security devices - Mnuchin chips the bird

"Abuse By The Police" Documentary Allows Victims Of Rape By Cops Who Got Away Scot Free To Speak Out

James OÂ’Keefe announces 'This may be the biggest story Project Veritas has ever broke' [CNN]

ELECTORAL COLLEGE OVERWHELMINGLY FAVORS REPUBLICANS, ABOLISHING ENTIRE SYSTEM ONLY REMEDY: STUDY

Rand Paul: Democrats Need to be Investigated Over Ukraine

Winnie the Pooh warns attempts to divide China will end in 'shattered bones'

A bunch of democratic faggot and tranvestite loving freaks from hell

Bill Barr Flames ‘Unremitting Assault’ On Religion, Traditional Values During Notre Dame Visit

Hunter Biden Steps Down From Chinese Board in Bid to fight.

AGW Hut! Hut! Huts! Woman Over Hot Dog

The NBA's China Problem Gets Worse After 2 American Arenas Eject Hong Kong Supporters

Jackie Brown star Robert Forster dies aged 78

A Latina novelist spoke about white privilege. Students burned her book in response.

Trump speaks to media during meeting with Chinese officials (Phase 1 trade treaty agreed to)

'Deeply harmful: Democrats fear O’Rourke will aid Trump by calling for seizing guns and taxing churches

Shepard Smith Stepping Down From Fox News

Orators of the Democrat Party

(WHOA!) Trump on Joe Biden at Rally, "He understood how to kiss Barack Obama's *ss".

Biden: ‘We Allow The Homophobes’ To Control The Agenda

SCARRED FOR LIFE: Post-Op Transgenders Start Movement to Encourage People to ‘Detransition’

President Trump is a Choir Boy Compared to Other Recent Presidents

With Request to Testify via Letter, Fake Whistleblower Achieves Peak Absurdity

More People Killed by Knives Than by Rifles, Shotguns, But Handguns Used in Most Murders

"It Drove Like A Drunk-Driver": Consumer Reports Eviscerates Tesla's Smart-Summon Feature

Does Corporate America Really Want to Hold a National Referendum on Whether Americans Value Their Own Freedoms or Corporate Freedom to Import Chinese Censorship More?

Neil deGrasse Tyson reacts to report of asteroids barreling toward Earth (Suggests asteroid "Deflector" shield like an 'Atari' game to protect Planet from annihilation)

Florida man who claimed self-defense after shooting man over parking spot sentenced

Buckle Up . . . Your Gym Bag

18-Year Old US Soldiers Now Entering Afghanistan 18 Years After War Began

Not-So-Smart Summoning

Why Gilligan’s Island May be the Answer to Police Brutality

NBA Now Requiring All Players To Stand For Chinese National Anthem

Live: President Trump destroying Biden… and signs Executive Orders on transparency

TRUMP RIDS MAJOR U.S. CONTAINER PORT OF CHINESE COMMUNIST CONTROL

About that Fox News POLL...

James Clapper Admits He Was Following Orders From His 'Commander-In-Chief, President Obama'

Tom Cotton to IC IG: Your Evasiveness On Whether You Backdated Changes to the Whistleblower Process Borders on Criminal Obstruction

Complete Guide to the Scandals of the Obama Admin

Maria Bartiromo: IG Report on FISA “Will Be Released October 18th – As Thick as Telephone Book”…

Burisma Paid Joe Biden $900,000 for Lobbying – Ukrainian MP

White House Declares War on Impeachment Inquiry, Claiming Effort to Undo Trump’s Election

American democracy dies in the Democrat’s Deep State Darkness

Toy Box Propaganda

China Banned South Park After the Show Made Fun of Chinese Censorship

The U.K. Must Ban Pointy Knives, Says Church of England

British PM to contact White House if U.S. diplomat's wife fails to face fatal crash

L.A. Times: Adam Schiff’s Gay Lover Makes Claims Of Abuse

Dick’s Destroyed $5 Mil. Worth of ‘Assault Rifles’ to Keep Them ‘Off the Street’

If A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words, Then What Do These Memes Say? (Parts VIII & I)


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

911
See other 911 Articles

Title: 9/11: Short And Powerful Questions
Source: Video Rebel's Blog
URL Source: https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2011 ... -short-and-powerful-questions/
Published: Aug 4, 2011
Author: Video Rebel
Post Date: 2019-09-19 11:48:17 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 230
Comments: 31

I wrote this because I wanted us to have short and powerful questions about 911 we can use in our everyday conversations. The banks in Europe and America are near collapse. Traditionally, Depressions mean war. And then there is the vote in September in the UN General Assembly on Palestinian statehood. Israel has threatened war to prevent any change to their occupation of Palestinian territory.

1) The Seattle King Dome was demolished by a controlled demolition on March 26, 2000 . When the building hit the ground, it registered a 2.3 on the Richter scale at a nearby seismology lab. WTC 7 had 6 times as much force potential to strike the ground as did the Dome yet barely scored 0.6 on the Richter scale. This means that most of WTC 7 was either vaporized or turned to dust before what was left of Tower 7 hit the ground. How do you explain the pulverization of concrete and the melting of steel especially since Tower 7 was never hit by a plane?

2) WTC Towers 1 and 2 both weighed 500,000 tons (453,592,400 kilograms) each. Neither one registered significant thuds on the Richter scale. Very little of this debris reached the ground. Do you really believe that a million tons of office furniture, filing cabinets, computers, phones, concrete and steel were either melted or vaporized or turned to dust by jet fuel and office fires? Might I point out that firemen said they could put out the fires in the North Tower with just two fire hoses and that you can see videos in which most of the jet fuel was consumed in a fireball on the planes impact with the Towers.

3) The government and the controlled media have claimed that on 911 19 Arabs hijacked 4 airplanes. Why does the final passenger and crew list not have even one Arab on any of the 4 planes?

4) The airlines even before 911 had people at every gate whose job it was to board ticketed passengers and give them boarding passes. If you believe that 19 Arabs hijacked 4 planes, how do you explain 19 Arabs getting on the planes without tickets and boarding passes?

5) A 600,000 pound (272,155.44 Kilogram) chunk of steel was severed from the WTC and blown 400 feet (121.92 Meters) into WTC Tower 3. Can you calculate the force that threw a 600,000 pound object 400 feet? Do you honestly believe this force can be explained by exploding jet fuel and office fires?

6) Jim Willie told us that the Treasury Department in the 1990s sold 2.2 trillion dollars more in Treasury bonds than were required to finance the debt. Jim Willie has a PhD in statistics and no banker or government official has yet come forward to dispute his claim. Are you aware that the evidence for this theft of 2.2 trillion dollars was in the offices of Cantor Fitzgerald at One World Trade Center on 9-11-2001 and that all evidence was conveniently vaporized?

7) There was a COMEX vault containing gold and silver bullion in the basement vault four levels down at WTC Tower 4. Were you aware that one billion dollars of gold and silver went missing from that supposedly secure vault the night before 911?

08) On 911 the SEC had offices in WTC Tower 7. The SEC had evidence which could have brought criminal charges against Enron’s Wall Street associated partners at major corporations. These same companies could have lost billions of dollars in civil and criminal penalties. Were you aware the records at the SEC in Tower 7 were vaporized on 911?

9) Are you aware that on 9-10-2001 Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, and his Comptroller, rabbi Dov Zakheim admitted that 2.3 trillion dollars was missing from DOD spending and could not be traced?

10) What do you think the odds were that it was just a coincidence that whatever struck the Pentagon on 911 was aimed directly at the men and women who were attempting to find the missing trillions killing them and stifling attempts to recover the stolen money?

11) Did you know that rabbi Dov Zakheim was President of SPC International in the 1990s which had a device called the Command Transmitter System that allowed the user to electronically and remotely control up to 8 planes at once so there was no need to have hijackers on board the planes?

12) Many of the WTC steel columns were cut into 30 foot lengths, a convenient size for the steel to be carried away by removal crews. Can you explain why jet fuel and office fires would be so precise in their measurement of the steel girders they cut?

13) 440,000 cubic yards (336,404.14 cubic meters) of reinforced concrete on WTC Towers 1 and 2 were pulverized and turned into dust. Perform this as a thought experiment or, if you are a professional, do it in real life. Take a cubic foot (0.028 cubic meter) block of reinforced concrete. Suspend it in the air. In the center of each of the six sides attach a sufficient amount of dynamite and explode all sides at the exact same second. Repeat this experiment until your cubic block of reinforced concrete is reduced to dust and not just pebbles. Now multiple that explosive force by 27 to calculate the force needed for one cubic yard and by 440,000 for the total force needed to turn the concrete at Towers 1 and 2 into dust. Can you honestly believe that much explosive power was generated by jet fuel and office fires?

14) Controlled demolition experts tell us that they strike the support in the basement before they start demolition. Prior to the first plane hitting the North Tower janitors and building engineers in the basement reported blasts that injured several workers and killed some A steel fire door was crumpled as if it were an aluminum can. 30 Seconds later these workers reported hearing a loud thump which they later learned was the plane’s impact. The government tried to explain these explosions were somehow caused by jet fuel from the planes more than 70 floors above. The fuel had leaked out and fell somehow into the basement below, and was ignited causing an explosion. Never mind that these explosions occurred prior to the plane’s impact. Do you believe the government’s explanation that a plane several miles from impact managed to leak fuel into the basement?

15) A first responder was in fear for his life when he saw the building coming down. He dove underneath a fire truck. After the building collapsed, he looked up and saw that the fire truck which had been above him had disappeared. How do you explain the missing fire truck?

16) Indira Singh was working as a medic volunteer on 911 at a triage unit near Tower 7. Before noon she was told that her unit would have to move because Tower 7 was going to come down. Rudy Giuliani said he had to move his command center out of WTC 7 because the building was coming down. BBC went on the air before WTC 7 collapsed and announced mistakenly that it had already come down. There were a few fires on 3 of the 47 floors but they were out. The BBC later said they were told this by Reuters. Reuters is a Rothschild company and has bought Associated Press. How do you explain the prior knowledge of these people of WTC 7’s collapse?

17) The North and South Towers had 47 central core steel columns and 236 perimeter columns for a total of 283. For the buildings to fall straight down at nearly free fall speed all 283 connections from the columns to each of the 110 floors had to be cut within a second of each other. Keeping in mind open air fires cannot reach half of the temperature required to melt steel, how do you explain (2 X 110 X 283) 62,260 connections in the two Towers all being severed simultaneously by an office fire? Isn’t this a definition of a controlled demolition?

18) A man was on stairwell B on the 4th floor of the North Tower) when the Tower above him collapsed. After it collapsed, he looked up and saw nothing above him but blue sky. He was not crushed by 500,000 tons (453,592,400 Kilograms) of falling debris. Everything above him had been vaporized or turned to dust. Do you honestly believe jet fuel and office fires did this?

19) Why was molten iron still at the WTC weeks after 911 when the rubble was removed? This has never been seen before in office fires.

20) Human bones were found on the roof of the Deutsche bank building across the street from the WTC. The bones were all centimeters in size. How do you explain office fires cutting human bones to such small sizes and depositing them on the roof of the nearby building?

21) On 9-11 cars a block away from the WTC exploded. How do you explain that by office fires?

22) Thermite was invented in 1893 in Germany. It has been used by welders for more than a 100 years to cut metal. Thermite has a metal oxide which increases the size of its flame by releasing oxygen. Sulfur, magnesium and aluminum can be added to increase the intensity of the burn. Nanothermite is available only from above top secret labs in the US and Israel. It’s fine milling and high surface area relative to its nanometer size volume allows it to reach a temperature of 5,200 degrees (2871.11 Celsius) and burn through steel girders in seconds. It can be sprayed on to a target and detonated later after it dries. Nanothermite flakes were found by multiple scientists and sent to different labs for testing. How do you explain the presence of nanothermite at the WTC? Do you honestly believe Osama bin Laden could have bought nanothermite from a top secret US or Israeli military site over the phone from his cave in Afghanistan using his American Express card?

23) Thermate is a variation of thermite. Sulfur in thermate reduces the melting point of steel. Sulfur residue was found on the steel at the WTC in the debris pile. How do you explain the presence of sulfur at the WTC?

24) The FBI never listed Osama bin Laden as being wanted for the WTC attack because they had no evidence of his guilt. Have you ever heard the controlled press say this?

25) 1,000,000 tons (907,184,800 Kilograms) of debris were supposed to have fallen on tanks in the lowest level of the 5 basement floors of WTC 1 and 2. Yet those tanks were not damaged by the collapse of the Towers but were severely damaged by the debris removal crew. How do you explain that?

26) Two Israeli teams filmed the impact of the planes on the Towers. They had their cameras set up and rolling before the first plane struck the North Tower. Most people have heard of the dancing Israelis. They were interviewed on Israeli TV and several of the 5 men admitted to being Mossad agents. The other team was a man and a woman who sent video of the impact to the US government. Susan Lindauer wrote about this in her book Extreme Prejudice. Bush said on 911 that he saw the first plane impact on live TV before entering that Florida classroom. So do you think this pre-knowledge of 911 indicates Israeli’s participation in the attack on America?

Are you willing to live in a once free nation that will not only allow but actively help a foreign power to blow up buildings with Americans inside, lie about it and spend trillions of your tax dollars killing millions of innocent people including its own soldiers for lies?

References:

I have a copy of the passenger and crew list from CNN here: No Arabs On The 4 Hijacked 911 Airliners
https://vidrebel.wordpress.com/2011/04/20/no-arabs-on-the-4-hijacked-911-airliners/

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Deckard (#0)

Title: 9/11: Short And Powerful Questions

tl;dr

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-19   11:54:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Deckard (#0)

This article doesn't lack question marks. And, as we all know, if there are no answers that's proof that there's a conspiracy.

misterwhite  posted on  2019-09-19   11:55:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: misterwhite (#2)

And, as we all know, if there are no answers that's proof that there's a conspiracy.

The thing is whitey - the official government narrative, the cave dwelling arab terrorists who "hate us for our freedom" is also a conspiracy.

Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.

Deckard  posted on  2019-09-19   12:32:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Deckard (#3)

the cave dwelling arab terrorists who "hate us for our freedom" is also a conspiracy.

So it's a lie that cave dwelling arab terrorists "hate us for our freedom".

misterwhite  posted on  2019-09-19   12:46:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: misterwhite (#2)

A K A Stone  posted on  2019-09-19   14:15:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Tooconservative (#1)

Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. –Karin Deshore, in a Nov. 7, 2001, New York Times interview

A K A Stone  posted on  2019-09-19   14:16:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: A K A Stone (#6)

Science - God

WenT ouT of our civilizaTion

When evoluTion became

Our monopoly religion

All The mysTerious missing links

Has coagulaTed Their brain cells

Love
boris

If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !

BorisY  posted on  2019-09-19   14:40:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: A K A Stone (#6)

Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building and that building had started to explode. –Karin Deshore, in a Nov. 7, 2001, New York Times interview

They were rectangular towers. It is not possible that she could see more than two sides of the tower. Therefore, her statement is a lie.

Eyewitnesses, even cops and other trained observers, are notoriously unreliable. Given a large enough pool of eyewitnesses, they can and do say almost any damned thing.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-19   17:45:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Tooconservative, A K A Stone, Liberator (#8)

Eyewitnesses, even cops and other trained observers, are notoriously unreliable.

All of them?

118 Witnesses to Explosions in the FDNY Oral Histories of 9/11

9/11 mystery: Contradictory witness accounts left out by official report - 'no accident'

Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.

Deckard  posted on  2019-09-20   5:49:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Deckard (#9)

All of them?

So many that it raises questions about whether we should rely on eyewitnesses at all. As many as 75% of false convictions are due to false eyewitness testimony.

118 Witnesses to Explosions in the FDNY Oral Histories of 9/11

Uh-huh. And why exactly should we give any of these so-called eyewitnesses such credibility when their testimony contradicts each other's testimony?

It is a very fundamental flaw when trying to prove something by eyewitness testimony from a large group of people when they keep saying contradictory things and seem so certain of their accounts. Clearly, they are not saying the same things.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-20   9:06:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: A K A Stone (#6)

Initially it was just one flash. Then this flash just kept popping all the way around the building

Flash? I don't see any flash. Your video shows puffs of smoke coming out of the windows as the building is collapsing and compressing the air.

Where's the flash? And wouldn't you expect explosives to be detonated before the building collapses rather than during the collapse?

misterwhite  posted on  2019-09-20   10:13:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: misterwhite (#11)

And wouldn't you expect explosives to be detonated before the building collapses rather than during the collapse?

Preceding and during the collapse.

A K A Stone  posted on  2019-09-20   13:01:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Deckard (#0)

Good bullet points.

(Can anyone refute them?)

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   7:28:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: A K A Stone (#5)

Interesting demonstration...

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   7:29:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Tooconservative, Deckard (#10)

Uh-huh. And why exactly should we give any of these so-called eyewitnesses such credibility when their testimony contradicts each other's testimony?

Some people say the same of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Btw, is it your contention that ALL 118 eyewitness testimonies are indeed "contradictory"?

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   7:31:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: BorisY (#7)

Science - God

WenT ouT of our civilizaTion

When evoluTion became

Our monopoly religion

All The mysTerious missing links

You're right -- that's the simple truth at its foundation.... The controlling Elites have replaced and usurped Biblical truth and authority and replaced it with the lies of their gods of (fake) Science, "Mother" Earth, and Luciferianism.

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   7:39:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Tooconservative (#8)

But...

What of the bullet point coincidences that must be cited as "evidence" of a motive?

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   7:41:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Tooconservative, Deckard (#10)

So many that it raises questions about whether we should rely on eyewitnesses at all. As many as 75% of false convictions are due to false eyewitness testimony.

Pure speculation. (Dismissed as a legit objection.)

...Why exactly should we give any of these so-called eyewitnesses such credibility when their testimony contradicts each other's testimony?

EXACTLY which eyewitnesses are suspect, Counselor? And on which specific eyewitness experience or testimony are they "contradictory"?

Clearly, they are not saying the same things.

Maybe because they all perceived different sights and sounds given.... THEY ARE DIFFERENT PEOPLE??

And again -- what of the several bullet points, which is merely a partial list of the conspicuous coincidences regarding that day (a collective mountain of info, acts, deaths, and omissions that provide damning evidence of motivation to commit this criminal act? Shall we ignore them ALL??)

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   7:50:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Liberator (#15)

Btw, is it your contention that ALL 118 eyewitness testimonies are indeed "contradictory"?

Not at all.

Some people say the same of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Those are very ancient sources, not remotely comparable to contemporary witnesses and events.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-21   12:03:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Liberator (#18)

And again -- what of the several bullet points, which is merely a partial list of the conspicuous coincidences regarding that day (a collective mountain of info, acts, deaths, and omissions that provide damning evidence of motivation to commit this criminal act? Shall we ignore them ALL??)

When witnesses are clearly contradicting each other, you have to determine which witnesses, if any, are conveying honest and accurate accounts consistent with physical evidence.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-21   12:05:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Tooconservative (#19)

Those [Matthew, Mark, Luke and John] are very ancient sources, not remotely comparable to contemporary witnesses and events.

I made the example to reinforce the point that though even the Apostles' expert "eyewitness/earwitness" testimony" may be different, (no matter how long ago) it's no less valid.

If even half of the 118 eyewitness testimony is tossed out as questionable, that still leaves ample testimony (approx 60 witnesses.) What of them?

Given it's arguable whether the truth in this matter was even desired, the credibility and motives of those interviewers or their overlords' integrity could be considered in question.

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   12:26:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Tooconservative (#20) (Edited)

When witnesses are clearly contradicting each other, you have to determine which witnesses, if any, are conveying honest and accurate accounts consistent with physical evidence.

Ok...acceptable.

So *has* that been determined? And by whom? Do we know this info? (18 years later)

And again -- what of the several bullet points, which is merely a partial list of the conspicuous coincidences regarding that day (a collective mountain of info, acts, deaths, and omissions that provide damning evidence of motivation to commit this criminal act?) Shall we ignore them ALL as well as the eyewitness testimony??

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-21   12:28:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Liberator (#22)

And again -- what of the several bullet points, which is merely a partial list of the conspicuous coincidences regarding that day (a collective mountain of info, acts, deaths, and omissions that provide damning evidence of motivation to commit this criminal act?) Shall we ignore them ALL as well as the eyewitness testimony??

You seem very impressed with bullet points recently. Okay.

  • You certainly do want to make much out of these tiny excerpts from the 118 eyewitnesses.
  • Let me just point out that these Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth do not provide further links or the full accounts offered by each witness. Therefore, we cannot evaluate to any extent how much the witnesses contradicted physical evidence or each other. Or if they were delusional or had impaired memory of the event.
  • When Truthers are editing/selecting the very short statements they chose to present to support their case, they are just as biased as the anti-Truthers in how they choose to excerpt that info, what to include/exclude. You wouldn't accept it if anti-Truthers were trying to prove their case by grabbing a paragraph or two here and there so why should anyone else accept that method if Truthers are using it (dishonestly) to try to prove their accusations?
  • It really is almost worthless to determining the accuracy and truthfulness of their statements. And, again, an unofficial "oral history" is not at all comparable to a real police or FBI investigation. For one thing, there are very real risks involved in lying to police and the spectre of federal prison if you lie to the FBI. Any asshole can say anything to FDNY in its "oral history" and there will be no legal consequences at all if they're lying through their teeth. Nor is there a competent investigatory arm to process their information or follow up on it. An "oral history" simply is not an investigation and cannot be regarded as one.

That should be bullety enough for you.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-21   16:01:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Tooconservative (#23) (Edited)

You seem very impressed with bullet points recently.

They simplify any given case, don't they? We can call them "Numerical Evidence" if you prefer.

(Good job by you here. See? "Bullet Points" is smart.)

* You certainly do want to make much out of these tiny excerpts from the 118 eyewitnesses.

How much testimony is sufficient? Why shouldn't, "I SAW....!!" be sufficient?

* Let me just point out that these Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth do not provide further links or the full accounts offered by each witness. Therefore, we cannot evaluate to any extent how much the witnesses contradicted physical evidence or each other. Or if they were delusional or had impaired memory of the event.

I disagree on the necessary correlation or corroboration of eyewitness testimony and deconstruction of building collapses via detonation.

As to your suggestion that perhaps there was some delusion or impairment or distortion of the event, yes, that is possible. That's why I suggested tossing out half the testimony, anecdotally. But even if we eliminate 80% of the testimony for various reasons, we still have 23 solid eye/ear witnesses, don't we? If you insist on tossing out 90%, we still have 10, 11 eye/ear witnesses.

* When Truthers are editing/selecting the very short statements they chose to present to support their case, they are just as biased as the anti-Truthers in how they choose to excerpt that info, what to include/exclude.

You wouldn't accept it if anti-Truthers were trying to prove their case by grabbing a paragraph or two here and there so why should anyone else accept that method if Truthers are using it (dishonestly) to try to prove their accusations?

WAIT...

What is the opposite of "Truther"??Is it..."anti-Truther"...or..."Liar"? (just sayin'.)

Let's stop with the pejorative term intended to discredit the source off the bat for those who merely seek truth. If it was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me. I don't refer to you and your ilk as "Lying Tools of Satan", do I?

(cont.)

The problem with this specific 911 case, TC, is that few edited or short statements and sound-bytes need to be presented; There are voluminous detailed charges and observations, and a complicated web of deceptions regarding the events of 911. NOT hit and run mini-claims or paragraphs that can't be proven. There are THOUSANDS OF PAGES. There are very serious, valid charges against the gubmint and its agencies -- there's no getting around it.

*It really is almost worthless to determining the accuracy and truthfulness of their statements. And, again, an unofficial "oral history" is not at all comparable to a real police or FBI investigation. For one thing, there are very real risks involved in lying to police and the spectre of federal prison if you lie to the FBI.

Back to dismissing the eyewitness testimony (with nothing to gain)??

Ok -- tell me exactly why the "testimony" of a gubmint and it's Alphabet Agys that are proven to routinely lie should carry ANY weight at all?

Moreover, did you really just cite the Feebs Investigation with respect to 911?? This same org that was involved in the coup against a sitting President?? Are you saying THEY are the ones whose word and motives we should believe??

* Any asshole can say anything to FDNY in its "oral history" and there will be no legal consequences at all if they're lying through their teeth. Nor is there a competent investigatory arm to process their information or follow up on it. An "oral history" simply is not an investigation and cannot be regarded as one.

WHAT is the motive to lie for a civilian? Moreover, YES, "oral history" IS valid. Otherwise the only "testimony" you'd have us consider as "valid" are only those in positions of "authority" -- yeah, like the Feebs, Alphabet Agts, MSM, Teachers, Scientists, and...Politicians -- ALL infamous for lying their azzes off in support of their own agenda and back account.

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-22   10:55:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Tooconservative (#23)

Btw, thank you for your civility and honesty in touching on the issues that you question.

Liberator  posted on  2019-09-22   11:00:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Deckard (#0)

3) The government and the controlled media have claimed that on 911 19 Arabs hijacked 4 airplanes. Why does the final passenger and crew list not have even one Arab on any of the 4 planes?

I can think of one political party in particular that would try to say that Muslims didn't do 9/11. It's also very helpful when you're trying to rewrite history later to be able to say "See, see I know what I'm talking about"...

Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!

CZ82  posted on  2019-09-22   12:49:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Liberator (#24)

As to your suggestion that perhaps there was some delusion or impairment or distortion of the event, yes, that is possible. That's why I suggested tossing out half the testimony, anecdotally. But even if we eliminate 80% of the testimony for various reasons, we still have 23 solid eye/ear witnesses, don't we? If you insist on tossing out 90%, we still have 10, 11 eye/ear witnesses.

Okay, let's take it as given.

So which 23 are the right ones? Which 10 or 11 are the "right ones"?

It doesn't really advance the case much if we have no way to determine which ones. And without their full remarks in the "oral history", we're already hobbled. You realize, usually an "oral history" interview is just someone writing down a conversation they have about their recollection of events. Even a courtroom examination by two opposing counsels does not always provide an ideal situation but for these so-called "witnesses" - actually people who were interviewed for the FDNY "oral history" - we don't even have a rigorous cross-examination of them to determine whose memory is accurate and whether their accounts fit with the known accepted facts. Nor do we know the full extent of how their accounts agree or disagree with one another.

I am not prepared to consider that the Truthers are including everything in their handpicked selection of quotes from this so-called "oral history" from the FDNY. Maybe the lady who saw the building explode all the way around went on later in the interview to describe that she saw the bomber and it was Elvis and he escaped the building just before it exploded and flew away on a UFO piloted by Michael Jackson. Who knows what all is in these accounts? NYC is full of nutjobs and FDNY is not immune to hiring them.

You can find a full oral history published by firefighter name at the more than 12,000 pages of oral histories rendered in the voices of 503 firefighters, paramedics, and emergency medical technicians in the New York Times archive.

So, the Architects & Engineer For 9/11 Kookery published their report and the first person's account was a Richard Banaciski. Well, going to the NYTimes archive page, we can quickly find his entire oral history account and evaluate it in full instead of the single paragraph in the AE911Truth quote. The actual statement is 7 pages long. Now, of course, you find this paragraph to be very compelling but only because you already believe the Truthy version of 9/11. That doesn't mean it moves a neutral reader toward Truthy explanations at all. Nor does it mean it moves them toward the officially blessed account of the 9/11 Commission. Most likely, the average non-CT just ends up with a mixed account of the 9/11 Commission with a bunch of doubts about it from the Truthers, much as the JFK assassination left much of the public mostly accepting the Warren Commission report but with many - perhaps a majority - believing that there were some major lies told to the public but without anyone agreeing on what is true or false or who actually did kill JFK. And maybe that's all the Truthers will ever accomplish, just to sow some doubts about 9/11 but never actually prove their case from the evidence.

Oh, well, I'm sure you can look forward to some old guys confessing to blowing up the towers when they get older. The same way some old mob guys have confessed to killing JFK but failing to provide any proof at all so no one believes them even though some crappy newspaper will publish a story about them on a slow news day around the time that their new book "I killed JFK" is being launched by the publisher (who pays off the newspaper and/or reporter to interview the author).

Ok -- tell me exactly why the "testimony" of a gubmint and it's Alphabet Agys that are proven to routinely lie should carry ANY weight at all?

Why are the Truthers (some of whom are professional CT profiteers and have made money from speeches and especially from books they write) any more trustworthy and unbiased than the feds and the Deep State? Why don't you just admit that the Truthers have as much bias and as much desire to have their views prevail as the officials and bureaucrats that work for the ruling classes? You're still choosing one set of federally-approved biased opinions and event history over another Truthier group of competing views of the same events. Or vice versa.

Pick yer poison.

In short, no, I don't accept eyewitness testimony as being as useful as physical evidence. Particularly not in a case where so much depends on technical analysis of a skyscraper complex with airliners smashing into it.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-22   18:05:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: Tooconservative (#27)

Maybe the lady who saw the building explode all the way around went on later in the interview to describe that she saw the bomber and it was Elvis and he escaped the building just before it exploded and flew away on a UFO piloted by Michael Jackson.

Why do you have to make stuff up?

A K A Stone  posted on  2019-09-22   18:39:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: A K A Stone (#28)

I'm just saying that some of these oral histories could be from total nutjobs but even with a nutjob you can find a paragraph or two that make sense. You have to look at the entire account and then compare it to known undisputed physical evidence to establish the probative value of any eyewitness account.

I was trying to illustrate that with my colorful example about Elvis and Michael Jackson and the UFO.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-22   19:55:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: A K A Stone (#28)

While pathological lying in no way is a clinical diagnosis, it can however oftentimes be a symptom of other issues. Like a conduct disorder – a group of behavioral and emotional problems.

As you have perceptively noticed, some people get so used to lying that they do so although there is no clear purpose – and even while their lying is being quite easily recognized.

This does quite naturally leave someone pondering over the point of those deceptions, which in turn causes them to ask …

Why do you have to make stuff up?

We have learned that some individuals find it extremely hard to apologize even after getting caught in a lie – they will never admit even the smallest wrongdoing.

While we might assume the reluctance of a non-apologist to be a simple matter of defensiveness or pride, it regrettable that a far-reaching psychological dynamic is many times at play. Unfortunately, the refusal to apologize does reflect efforts to protect their fragile sense of self.

Salute,
Gatlin

Gatlin  posted on  2019-09-22   20:16:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: Gatlin (#30)

I don't go in for online apologies.

But at least I don't offer people cynical, manipulative, self-serving and insincere apologies. Which is what you do on a regular basis.

Tooconservative  posted on  2019-09-22   21:35:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com