FBI: 9/11 controlled demolition theory is, “backed by thorough research and analysis”

reply to post by kwakakev


Either deny ignorance.......... or promote it on a daily basis, with a plethora of delusional threads, that entirely lack logic and real facts.

Originally posted by kwakakev


There is a lot about 9/11 case and the social reaction to it that I find odd. This part about the dogs is not one of them.

Since the 1993 car park bombing in the WTC, security was upgraded a dog permanently stationed on the delivery ramp going into this building. If this dog was to go people would ask questions as it had become a standard part of daily operations. Other dogs come and go depending on the risk assessment as decided by the company managing security. People would not find it unusual for dogs to be on patrol one day and not the next.

Where were the other dogs? Were there no other dogs in fixed positions?

The reason I ask is that it seems to me that you are desperate to find reasons why this dog was there that fit a conspiracy narrative. The answer you've arrived at is that "people would have found it odd if it was removed". But this is based on the assumption that no other dogs were in positions such that people might have questioned their removal. Quite a stretch. And you don't seem to subject the evidence for the removal of the dogs to the same scrutiny.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Where were the other dogs?

This has already been discussed on this thread. They where removed when the threat assessment was reduced from a high level about a week or two before 9/11.

Were there no other dogs in fixed positions?

Not that I am aware off. If there is any other information about this I would like to hear it.

The reason I ask is that it seems to me that you are desperate to find reasons why this dog was there that fit a conspiracy narrative.

More concerned that desperate, but I do not fully accept the official story as complete and fully accurate and trying to piece the remaining questions back together. There are many different facts and conflicting theories with the conspiracy narratives and it takes time to asses which ones are likely and reasonable while which ones are not.

And you don't seem to subject the evidence for the removal of the dogs to the same scrutiny.

I have not come across any evidence indicating that most of the dogs where not removed. I have not seen the evidence as to why there was a change in the security threat. I have not seen the security plan that says exactly how many dogs and men are stationed and on patrol where.

As a tip, presenting evidence and attacking the message comes across as more reasonable than attacking the messenger.

Originally posted by kwakakev

This has already been discussed on this thread. They where removed when the threat assessment was reduced from a high level about a week or two before 9/11.

I meant where were they stationed. You seem to think that Sirius was not removed because he was in an obvious position so people would have asked questions had he been removed. Why would that not apply to the other animals?

Note that the dogs were removed the previous Thursday. The only reference to "two weeks" in the quote on which this is all based is to suggest that the extra security had only been in operation for two weeks. So in actual fact the removal of the dogs is highly unlikely to be suspicious because it would only allow a long weekend to place charges, and in any case they weren't usually there.

Not that I am aware off. If there is any other information about this I would like to hear it.

Do you know how many dogs there were? You say you don't know where they were and yet you're confident to say why Sirius was left behind. I just can't fathom this level of certainty when you have so few facts. It looks like your'e making excuses for the conspiracy theory. Or at the very least like you're very keen to believe it.

More concerned that desperate, but I do not fully accept the official story as complete and fully accurate and trying to piece the remaining questions back together. There are many different facts and conflicting theories with the conspiracy narratives and it takes time to asses which ones are likely and reasonable while which ones are not.

I don't really think there is an "OS" as such. It seems to me there are several narratives, and to treat them as a single entity presupposes a conspiracy, which is not good or honest analysis.

However, that's not really the issue. The point is that the CT says "all the dogs were removed. Weird, huh?"

Answer: "No, they weren't."

CT: "Well, obviously they left that one behind, but that's just because removing it would be weird."

Answer: "So, removing the others wouldn't be weird?"

CT: "Obviously not, because they removed those."

Can you see how this is a perfectly circular piece of logic?

I have not come across any evidence indicating that most of the dogs where not removed. I have not seen the evidence as to why there was a change in the security threat. I have not seen the security plan that says exactly how many dogs and men are stationed and on patrol where.

Fair enough. But that makes it kind of imperative that one reserves judgement, surely? The source for the dog removal suggests that the WTC was returning to a normal security level after two weeks of increased security, which doesn't seem that strange to me.

As a tip, presenting evidence and attacking the message comes across as more reasonable than attacking the messenger.

My apologies. I'm not trying to insult you, but I do feel at liberty to point out where your argument seems weak. It's not personal.

Originally posted by roboe
reply to post by torontoguy123

 

Only 2½ years late on that one, since AE911Truth starting flouting it in December 2008. Remind me, how many arrests for the "Inside jobby job" have we seen since then?

Oh right, a big, fat ZERO.

Standard Reply Forms for 9/11 Truth coming your way

About he same amount of arrests we've seen against the alleged perps.

However both sides are 0/0 for convictions.

If that doesn't show you the OS isn't on the up an up you have no clue about justice, liberty, or the legal system.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


The high security level was lifted on the 9th, 3 days before the attack. There are some reports that most of the dogs where removed on the 6th, 5 days before the attack whatreallyhappened.com... . The reference of "two weeks" is wrong, so is the statement that "all the dogs where removed" as demonstrated by Sirius. There is a lot of support for Sirius and his funeral was a big event supporting his presence at the towers as fact.

It looks like your'e making excuses for the conspiracy theory. Or at the very least like you're very keen to believe it.

I believe in science, it is a process of trial and error.

The point is that the CT says "all the dogs were removed. Weird, huh?"

Just a little incomplete with all the technicalities and specifics around the case. Most of the dogs removed is accurate. I did not know there was still one dog stationed in the basement until this thread. Your circular logic is great if you want to chase your tail, I want to get to the point.

- At least one dog is permanently stationed in the basement is part of standard security protocols.
- Other dogs come and go depending on a risk assessment.
- In the 3 - 5 days before the attack the risk assessment changed and most of the dogs where not on site.

But that makes it kind of imperative that one reserves judgement, surely?

I might not have access to every piece of the puzzle, but that does not mean I cannot form some parts of the picture. Researching and learning these events is more about understanding than judgement.

Originally posted by kwakakev

Just a little incomplete with all the technicalities and specifics around the case. Most of the dogs removed is accurate. I did not know there was still one dog stationed in the basement until this thread. Your circular logic is great if you want to chase your tail, I want to get to the point.

My point was that thhe circular logic is in the CT!

- In the 3 - 5 days before the attack the risk assessment changed and most of the dogs where not on site.

As per a normal situation. And not giving nearly enough time to wire the building.

Researching and learning these events is more about understanding than judgement.

I don't really follow the difference.

The fact is the FBI are right, control demolition is back by real science and most people know that now accept the few in here who will not deny ignorance.
www.ae911truth.org...

If anyone wants to call all these experts, scientist and all their technical paper, journals liars, then I challenged anyone of you to bring your science here, to dispute it.