Still Think the World is Waking up to the Conspiracy?

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: hellobruce

Just everyone is clear, this is the theory that you support.

Typical truther, wrong again. Where did I say the plane at the Pentagon vaporised? Where did I claim the plane that crashed in Shanksville also vaporised?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: hellobruce

Just everyone is clear, this is the theory that you support.

Typical truther, wrong again. Where did I say the plane at the Pentagon vaporised? Where did I claim the plane that crashed in Shanksville also vaporised?

Why don't you give us a link to show the 2 planes being reconstructed to investigate the cause of crash? Or was the Fox and CNN narration good enough for your theory to take shape?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: hellobruce

Just everyone is clear, this is the theory that you support.

Typical truther, wrong again. Where did I say the plane at the Pentagon vaporised? Where did I claim the plane that crashed in Shanksville also vaporised?

Yeah it never fails. Truthers can't argue the facts of 9/11 and so they must construct a strawman to attack.

But it's like Bill (Skeptic Overlord) has said, " Truthers are activists."

Being an activist makes truthers believe that it is ok to lie, or to knowingly repeat lies, or to misrepresent what their discussion opponent has said, because the greater good of their "cause" makes it ok to lie - IOW, the ends justifies the means.

Of course their "cause" is an ever moving, ever changing thing that no one, including themselves, can ever pin down. They just "feel" that they are on the side of justice, and so anything they say or do is ok.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

Why don't you give us a link to show the 2 planes being reconstructed to investigate the cause of crash? Or was the Fox and CNN narration good enough for your theory to take shape?

His objection is that he never said that the planes vaporized. That is YOUR strawman argument.

Why is it that truthers must construct a strawman to attack?

Why can't all of you just discuss what is actually said?

Is it a pathological necessity that enables one to become a truther?

originally posted by: lexyghot

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
a reply to: hellobruce

Just everyone is clear, this is the theory that you support.

Typical truther, wrong again. Where did I say the plane at the Pentagon vaporised? Where did I claim the plane that crashed in Shanksville also vaporised?

Yeah it never fails. Truthers can't argue the facts of 9/11 and so they must construct a strawman to attack.

But it's like Bill (Skeptic Overlord) has said, " Truthers are activists."

Being an activist makes truthers believe that it is ok to lie, or to knowingly repeat lies, or to misrepresent what their discussion opponent has said, because the greater good of their "cause" makes it ok to lie - IOW, the ends justifies the means.

Of course their "cause" is an ever moving, ever changing thing that no one, including themselves, can ever pin down. They just "feel" that they are on the side of justice, and so anything they say or do is ok.

Typical OS'er tactic to attack and dehumanize people rather than address what they have to say.

What - about what I said - is your post referring to? Where did I lie?

originally posted by: lexyghot

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

Why don't you give us a link to show the 2 planes being reconstructed to investigate the cause of crash? Or was the Fox and CNN narration good enough for your theory to take shape?

His objection is that he never said that the planes vaporized. That is YOUR strawman argument.

Why is it that truthers must construct a strawman to attack?

Why can't all of you just discuss what is actually said?

Is it a pathological necessity that enables one to become a truther?

It is not the official account that the planes were vaporized? Oh! My bad. Show me the planes reconstructed then. Unless it was vaporized there should have been a collection of debris that could be pieced back together and reconstruct the plane. You know, like an investigation.

The planes were not vaporised? Is that the claim?

a reply to: hellobruce

Try www.911woodybox.blogspot.com

The 2 flight data recorders offered by the government were frauds, especially that for 77. As analyzed by Dennis Cimino, an expert in the field, the unit for 77 was not even assigned to an airframe.

Such small details can be overlooked when one is concocting a story. There were many other absurdities reflected in the analysis for 77.

Maybe I've studied Shanksville a little better than you. FYI even the mayor of the town has made public statements that there was no Boeing there. The DNA analysis of the "passengers" was a sham. Bollyn interviewed Coroner Miller in the fall of 2011 and wrote about it in March 2012. It seems everybody in Shanksville understands it was a major deception.

a reply to: lexyghot

Truthers are activists

That's Rubbish!

Truther's as you call them are truth seekers who do not believe in the usual Zionist Baloney being fed by the Lamestream Media and Corrupt Governments!

We are not activists. Just because I read stuff and watch some videos and give my opinion on them does not make me an activist. Just because I do not agree with what is being shoved down my throat by lying and corrupt Governments does not make me an activist.

Just because I want to know what is really going on and because I think we are fed a bunch of lies does not make me an activist!

If you disagree with what I'm saying then so be it. That's YOUR opinion!

In fact let's turn this around a little bit. What if the information you have been fed and which you believe is false and the Official Story is a bunch of lies? Then you are an activist too for trying to promote the lies! Because you are also a Truther. You are feeding what you have been told as Truth!

The Door swings both ways my friend!

We know the story of WMD's in Iraq was a bunch of lies! What else is a bunch of lies? Well certainly what is going on in Syria and Iraq right now with ISIS.

See where I am going with this? Can you honestly say you believe THEM when they have shown to lie so much about other things going on in the past, present and future?

This is MY opinion!

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Show us where it's SOP to rebuild EVERY plane that crashed. Cases where the cause is known there is no reason to reconstruct anything. The purpose of reconstruction is to determine cause.

The CVR recorded the crew being attacked, and people that were obviously not the assigned crew taking over. The FDR showed nothing wrong up until impact.

There was no reason for a reconstruction.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
Why don't you give us a link to show the 2 planes being reconstructed to investigate the cause of crash?

We know the cause of the crash, so why would the planes be reconstructed? You appear to also know nothing at all about air crash investigation!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Show us where it's SOP to rebuild EVERY plane that crashed. Cases where the cause is known there is no reason to reconstruct anything. The purpose of reconstruction is to determine cause.

The CVR recorded the crew being attacked, and people that were obviously not the assigned crew taking over. The FDR showed nothing wrong up until impact.

There was no reason for a reconstruction.

I guess since CNN and FOX were narrating who did it and why before noon on 9/11 the CVR's would have useless anyway. Unless your saying that the CVR's were recovered and analysed by that time...

So the most of the plane WAS recovered? Just not bothered with? Did they sell that to China too or was it destroyed or what?

This started by me posting the claim that 2 planes were vaporized. Are you refuting that?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
Why don't you give us a link to show the 2 planes being reconstructed to investigate the cause of crash?

We know the cause of the crash, so why would the planes be reconstructed? You appear to also know nothing at all about air crash investigation!

Don't worry about what I know or do not know, this has nothing to do with me unless your claiming a grievance with me pointing out my observations about events. Is that against the T&C here or are you unjustifiably attacking me unabated by moderators?

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
Don't worry about what I know or do not know,

Well, we know you do not know why they reassemble some crashed aircraft....

a reply to: MALBOSIA

There was debris recovered from all four aircraft. No they didn't "vaporize".

Investigations take years for the final report to be released. The decision to reconstruct or not is part of that process. Aircraft are reconstructed when there isn't enough information to determine a cause. It is done to determine if an internal mechanical problem occurred, or if something external to the aircraft caused it.

What good is a reconstruction going to do an investigation of a hijacking? Even IF enough debris had been recovered, it wasn't a problem with the aircraft, so they would have wasted time, money, and resources for zero return. There was no question the aircraft were deliberately crashed.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: MALBOSIA
Don't worry about what I know or do not know,

Well, we know you do not know why they reassemble some crashed aircraft....

Enlighten me bruce.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MALBOSIA

There was debris recovered from all four aircraft. No they didn't "vaporize".

Investigations take years for the final report to be released. The decision to reconstruct or not is part of that process. Aircraft are reconstructed when there isn't enough information to determine a cause. It is done to determine if an internal mechanical problem occurred, or if something external to the aircraft caused it.

What good is a reconstruction going to do an investigation of a hijacking? Even IF enough debris had been recovered, it wasn't a problem with the aircraft, so they would have wasted time, money, and resources for zero return. There was no question the aircraft were deliberately crashed.

Was the narration of a hijacking not given before the CVR were analysed?

a reply to: MALBOSIA

I absolutely believe the official story is either a partial lie or incomplete. But your question is very easy to answer. The "narrative of a hijacking" was because flight attendants on Flight 11 called the airport to alert them the plane had been hijacked. Mohammed Atta accidentally transmitted his message intended for the passengers to the control tower. Granted, that only covers 2 planes, but it more than suffices to confirm the planes were hijacked.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

The problem is, the theory as written by a 9/11 Truther is just as incomplete..misstated...wrong as most truther ideas. Osama did not "direct" the attack. The hijackers had a plan and were turned loose. The building collapses as described in your post are missing details. Flight 77 did not "vaporize". You wonder why people refuse to take the truth movement seriously.

a reply to: MALBOSIA

Four aircraft suddenly go dark, at about the same time. Two of them say over the ATC radio that they have some planes, and demanfs were made. Three aircraft slam into buildings, while the fourth was seen at low altitude, performing unusual maneuvers, before diving into the ground. Not to mention calls over the aircraft phone systems.

Unless four crews suddenly went insane at the same time, the CVR wasn't necessary for confirmation, except MAYBE for Flight 93.

a reply to: Salander

Dennis Cimino? The Legend in His Own Mind? That Dennis? You should study his "history" first.