"The truth movement needs to focus on what is simply undeniable"

reply to post by dereks

Except that you did...."I would also point out that a Bush family member was the head of security for the WTC complex."

He was NOT head of security, that is a lie, he was on the board. He was not even on the board of the company in charge of security during the attacks!

First of all, the Board of Directors is the "head" of the company and being on that board, means that you are heading the company. So, Marvin was the head of the security company that provided security to the WTC complex, thus he was the head of Security and this company had ties with the Bush dynasty, a family that was involved in a fascist coup attempt in 1933, as well as the Iran-Contra affair, a scandal that involved actually paying the Iranians to keep American hostages longer than they actually wanted to. It also involved shipping illegal drugs into the country, according to several eye-witnesses.

So, a company that did root work on the WTC in the timeframe just before these buildings collapsed in an unprecidented structural failure, had ties with a family that is famous for treasonous acts against the US and seems to have little regard for American life. This in of itself should be enough to warrant an investigation.

Furthermore, I never once said, suggested or even implied that he was the head of the company during the attacks, as such a notion is completely irrelevant to the point made. Is that really so hard for you to comprehend or is it that you have no logical rebuttal for the informatoin provided? Lol, people can't deny the message, so they try and twist semantics, taking things out of context as best they can, while ignoring complete words and the entire point. Come on, you can do better than that.

The point was that Marvin Bush was the head of a company that provided security to the WTC complex during the time that this company installed a new security system in the buildings. It matters not whether the company was contracted during the attacks. Furthermore, installing a new security system in high-rise like that is not the same as installing a security in your home. It actually involves getting access to every nook and cranny in that building, as well as some pretty heavy construction/maintenance.

If you don't have a valid argument, don't try to argue, as it only hurts your credibility. Hey, I'm just trying to help you. It is not a lie, Marvin Bush was the head of security for the WTC complex and that really isn't debated by anyone credible person or entity. Are you trying to suggest that he wasn't on the board of Securacom in the years leading up to 9/11 or even in the years that they were contracted for the WTC security system? If that is what you are trying to claim, do you have proof of your outrageous claim? If that isn't want you are suggesting, then what is your issue?

--airspoon

I guess that settles that.

If anyone else wants to help me come up with "simply undeniable" facts or existing persuasive evidence please feel free to help me with this pamphlet. I would like to copy sentences verbatim if at all possible.

So just which of these theories, all conspiracy theories put forward by truthers do you want them to air?

Holographic planes?

no

Pod carrying, missile firing planes?

no

nanoo nanoo thermite was used?explosives were used?

maybe......but there has been NO testing to PROVE either way...was there!

The helipad at the Pentagon lifted up and a missile was fired at the Pentagon from it?

something made the 16 to 18 foot diameter hole into the second floor slab...and an UNBROKEN third floor window right above....of course till the facade collapsed 35 min. after impact.

Flight 77 was landed somewhere, the crew and passengers were transported to the Pentagon, along with their luggage, aircraft seats, aircraft engines, aircraft undercarriage, etc etc then a missile was fired at the Pentagon?
Mini nuclear weapons were used to blow up WTC 1 & 2?
Beam Weapons were used on WTC 1&2?
etc etc.

All these are conspiracy theories put forward by truthers, no one else. So which ones should the MSM publish

Why the massive, energy and resource intensive effort to hide something?

What massive, energy and resource intensive effort are you talking about?

I think the government and media's actions and inacrtions after the fact, is one of the most damning pieces of evidence that is extremely telling as to who may be responsible.

I think it is paramount that people research on their own,

Yes, and they will find truthers posting all those silly conspiracy theories above, or "scientific research" into the WTC like this:

edit on 25/9/10 by dereks because: fixed quotes

but you know..the BIGGEST CONSPIRACY THEORY of all....is the OS

1. No proof the WTC steel reached any kind of compromising temp....ALL found evidence PROVES the OPPOSITE.

2. NO testing for explosives or accelerants to BACK the OFFICIAL Gov. claim that there were NONE....just an arbitrary statement to follow an agenda.

3. The only evidence that NIST has to prove their HYPOTHESIS......is the DATA they REFUSE to release. 68,000 files of data they fed into their computer sims to lead them in a DIRECTION that ONLY FIRE caused ALL 3 collapses....yes, I said ALL.....cause 14.5% asymmetrical structural damage from IMPACTS didn't do it.

reply to post by patriots4truth


There aren't any undeniable facts.

As airspoon has shown, the "facts" that Truthers put out tend not to be quite so unequivocal when subjected to scrutiny.

well clearly the debunker crew are in force here,and when you get most of the worlds best explosive experts say the towers were blown up,but these paid to post debunkers know more,and no doubt their say reveal your source,do you're own hunting for answers,its not hard to find,and if this is to get a proper independent investigation,that this deserve's,then we have to stay away from the no plane theory and other claims even if you wholeheartedly believe it to be true,and stick with hard facts,that are abundant in the destruction of the towers(WTC7),we dont need to throw these out of the box theory's,there's enough simple clear facts already,that would in a normal criminal investigation get a retrial.

Originally posted by patriots4truth
Truthers, which simply undeniable evidence/facts would you put in a pamphlet if you had limited space to persuade others to become a truther? You cannot put youtubes in thea pamphlet and you are expected to document your sources.

Why weren't any of the 19 (or 20 if we want to believe he was running late...........) alleged hijackers on ANY of the 4 manifests? How did they possibly board 4 planes that day without appearing on any passengers' list? They didn't use any aliases because according to the first reports, everyone was accounted for.

I know I can't get past the sky-cap kiosk without providing proof of who I am at which time, they check my name against their list!

So many 'firsts' happened that fateful day!

Originally posted by airspoon

First I want to say, we're both on the same side. But most of what you are saying (which I totally agree) can be argued as speculative or coincidental at best. I know I know....I don't buy it either but for instance, Put Options is not proof. They will say it was just 'good intuition' (or some bullcrap like that)

Also, I would point out the fact that Osama Bin Laden claimed he didn't do it, which would defeat the whole purpose of a terrorist attack.

However....................THIS is pivotal. Many don't realize bin Laden denied any wrong-doings for that day. One would think he'd be gloating, bragging and smiling all the way from Afghanistan to America if he was able to pull this off!



Sept 16 2001 CNN
Bin Laden says he wasn't behind attacks

debunk this.

is it fair to say,that certain people in the power that day(i'm talking all the way down the chain),didn't do their job and did nothing while 3000 people lossed thier lifes,failed to react to a life or death situation,surely these people should stand trial,for their incompetence,as clearly someone or many were clearly letting things unfold,without reaction,its kinda like letting a mad man on the button of a bomb,and if you got the power to turn off that bomb,BUT instead sit and watch and do nothing,then you are as much to blame as the mad man pressing the bomb button...now i know you're gonna say they done that,BUT it needs to be done with a independent jury,and judges and proper indepedent investigation...not people hand pick from the goverment with pre set question's.

i guarantee that if this process is done right,then were all find out what really went on that day,and its a matter of time,before people in power that day start talking,as soon as a few of them see there getting all the blame,there start exposeing others...

maybe this is were we need to start...taking the people in power of decision making to task,in a full public indepedent inquiry

Originally posted by snapperski
well clearly the debunker crew are in force here,and when you get most of the worlds best explosive experts say the towers were blown up,but these paid to post debunkers know more,and no doubt their say reveal your source,do you're own hunting for answers,its not hard to find,and if this is to get a proper independent investigation,that this deserve's,then we have to stay away from the no plane theory and other claims even if you wholeheartedly believe it to be true,and stick with hard facts,that are abundant in the destruction of the towers(WTC7),we dont need to throw these out of the box theory's,there's enough simple clear facts already,that would in a normal criminal investigation get a retrial.

Typical bit of trutherism; you say " most of the worlds best explosive experts say the towers were blown up."
That is your statement and it is really up to you to back that up because I believe it is false. Can you, will you ?

reply to post by Alfie1


www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

honestly,how can you say WTC7 was not controlled demolitions,even the owner admits it,BUT yet you still belive the government report...helloooooooooo!!!!!

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by patriots4truth
Truthers, which simply undeniable evidence/facts would you put in a pamphlet if you had limited space to persuade others to become a truther? You cannot put youtubes in thea pamphlet and you are expected to document your sources.

Why weren't any of the 19 (or 20 if we want to believe he was running late...........) alleged hijackers on ANY of the 4 manifests? How did they possibly board 4 planes that day without appearing on any passengers' list? They didn't use any aliases because according to the first reports, everyone was accounted for.

I know I can't get past the sky-cap kiosk without providing proof of who I am at which time, they check my name against their list!

So many 'firsts' happened that fateful day!

I find it hard to beleive that in 2010 this old chestnut is still raised. The lists you are referring to are victim lists and not passenger manifests ; -

www.911myths.com...

I do find it ironic that people who broadly accept the official line on 9/11 are characterized by truthers as being sheeple who accept anything but , time and time again on here, it is evident that so many truthers haven't got a clue and that 5 minutes googling is beyond them.

reply to post by snapperski


Unfortunately incompetence is not illegal unless you prove intent! Being stupid is not a crime. Incompetence just means you're not qualified.


However, incompetence was enough to have every single official in office (from Prez to secretary of defense & everyone in between) impeached!!

I think the American Terrorists from 9-11 hide behind the saying: Never ascribe to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence”

I've been over this many, many times now. The longer I spend finding evidence and showing it to truthers, the more I start to understand why so many have given up even talking to you.

I read the evidence posted here. You know what evidence I found? NONE. All I heard was literally and paraphrased "you can't trust them! They obviously did it! No way it happened the way they say! Anyone who supports OS is blind or a disinformation proponent!"

I hear posting about who's related to who, who said what, etc. etc. etc. Yet, what I am not hearing is anything even remotely close to evidence that anything is true about the conspiracy theory.

The most I've gotten from this is that it is possible for explosives to have been planted. Guess what? That doesn't mean that it was done! It's possible that I could have bought a gun in the past few weeks. I had the money, and the time, and I don't necessarily need a solid motive. But did I? No.

The fact is, there are no actual facts that refute the OS. All there is to support the truther movement is say-so and disbelief. In other words people, you are in a psychological state of denial, deciding to place the blame on someone.

Originally posted by snapperski
reply to post by Alfie1

 

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

honestly,how can you say WTC7 was not controlled demolitions,even the owner admits it,BUT yet you still belive the government report...helloooooooooo!!!!!

edit on 28-9-2010 by snapperski because: (no reason given)

Read the ATS link in my signature that relates to WTC 7. nvm, I'll post it for you, buddy:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

That was a post done with extensive research and evidence refuting the claims that NIST was incompetent as well as providing reasonable explanations for everything that fits the observations. ^^

reply to post by Alfie1


I don't know what you're inferring but first off, I don't use Wikipedia for references.

It was UNKNOWN for days who the hijackers were because NONE of them were on the MANIFEST list. Remember..........it took a pristine passport, bandanna, a rental car with a 'how to fly a plane', the Koran and a video of a drunk Muslim, to identify some of them.

One would think if an airline accident occurred, you go to the passenger list to see if there were any shady names on it (or something like that. I am exaggerating my point but) those 19 Arabs were NOT on the lists.

The victim's list is totally different. That's made up after the fact.

I remember the days following 9-11. Everyone was very confused as to who was who and why this happened. I recall emphatically there were NO foreign-terrorist-like names on the lists which added to the confusion. I was 40 years old then. How old were you? I ask because if you're just joining the fight now as a youngster, I want to be able to help you understand fact from fabrication.

I usually point to Lt Col Anthony Shaffer, Robert Wright and Sibel Edmonds and that's all that is needed to start changing minds.

Originally posted by snapperski
reply to post by Alfie1

 

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

honestly,how can you say WTC7 was not controlled demolitions,even the owner admits it,BUT yet you still belive the government report...helloooooooooo!!!!!

edit on 28-9-2010 by snapperski because: (no reason given)

Have you given up on substantiating your statement " most of the worlds best explosive experts say the towers were blown up "?

Anyway, to turn to WTC 7. Many truthers maintain that the collapse of this building is a smoking gun for cd and an inside job. I maintain, to the contrary, that it in fact represents a gaping hole in truther theories. Truthers often claim that the Towers were controlled demolitions but that these were disguised by having planes flown into them. Not only that, the disguises were so brilliant that the perps managed to find a way to make the cd's initiate at the plane points of impact.

Now, as regards WTC 7, what did the perps plan to disguise the cd of that ? Apparently absolutely nothing. It was by chance that falling debris from WTC 1 hit it and started fires and it was by chance that falling debris cut off water supplies so that fires could not be fought and sprinklers would not work. If you take that chance happenstance out of the equation what must have been the original plan if it was a cd. Just to blow it up in broad daylight, in the middle of New York. How could that be when the alleged cd of the Towers was so ingeniously camouflaged ?

No, it doesn't make any sense at all. WTC 7 was collateral damage. What would have been the purpose in destroying it anyway ? To hide secrets I have heard said. Does it make sense to blow up a building and spread papers over half Manhattan and have hundreds of responders picking over the site to hide secrets ? Nobody got a shredder ?

reply to post by Alfie1


well concerning papers being flown all over the city,let me tell you,if i had things i wanted covered up,and i know there was a paper trail,and i have to produced them,well building 7 was a blessing,as i would lose all my paper trail,by removeing it,and burning or what have you,and claim...OH WHAT A SHAME,ALL THE PAPER WORK WAS IN BUILDING 7...TSK TSK..even the owner slipped up and said they agreed to pull it..1200 architects and engineers must be wrong,and you're right,maybe you should be the head of UN alien contact committee

reply to post by snapperski


But by your same logic, hundreds of thousands of architects and engineers are wrong as well? You see how things break down from here.

Hey Alfie1, what would your rebuttal be to the whistleblowers Lt Col Shaffer, Robert Wright, or Sibel Edmonds about prior knowledge?