Beverly Eckert - Death by a "mysterious commuter airplane crash." I read the NTSB report about it. I'm not quite sure what's so "mysterious" about it.

Kenneth Johannemann - Death by suicide. Okay... so maybe he couldn't live with the guilt that he survived while so many others around him died. The video states that he was evicted and was offered a place to live by an extended family member. Perhaps he also couldn't live with the shame that he may have by having to rely on someone else's help after surviving on his own for so long. Or maybe he was just a manic depressive and couldn't go on living.

Michael Doran - Single engine plane crash. So? Perhaps he forgot to do his daily checks, or perhaps he stalled out, or perhaps he fell asleep while flying.


Okay, not gonna bother with the rest since obviously the creator of the film wanted to build a pattern.

HOWEVER...

How many other "truthers" have spoken out and not died? How many witnesses who repeat the official story have died? Tens of thousands of people were witness to the events that day. It's not hard to imagine that many of them have died for various legitimate reasons. Just because someone spoke out against the official story doesn't mean that they were killed because of it. Too many of those comparisons in the video (and a few subsequent websites that I visited) seemed to be too far of a stretch.

Then GTFO

As for Building 7... well, like I've always stated, perhaps that one was a controlled demolition. It did house some very important government offices that held highly classified and sensitive material. It was likely better to raze the building than have a hundred officers stand guard around it, making sure no looters or other vagrants entered and got their hands on said information. Chances are even if the government said it was a controlled demolition, they still would have had a ton of people try to check out the rubble and search for things.

The silence is deafening.

Of course no truther is going to give their theories - they have none. Their logic is basically:

- A and B are the only possibilities.
- A is false.
- Since A is false, B must be true.

They never actually prove that B is true, and their attempts to prove A as false are sketchy at best. They are the equivalent of a defense lawyer for a murderer trying to confuse the jury by bringing up 20 other suspects that might have done it, without ever providing any evidence any of those 20 did do it.

This is why they all run and hide when you ask them to explain what happened. They can't because they don't have an answer - all they do is try to dispute the official events to prove "A" as wrong.




As to building 7, there's a reason why the truthers are concentrating on this compared to the WTC towers. That's because we have the least amount of evidence to explain what happened. So it's much easier for these idiots to twist the facts around to try and introduce doubt into people's minds about what happened. Blaupunkt69 pointed out a serious flaw in their logic last year:

Okay, so who were these people who threatened him? If he received calls, he should have a record of the numbers they originated from. If he received emails, he should have copies printed out. If the media told him to stop talking about it, he should be able to mention what producers/anchors/field reporters told him that. And if he had all that information, he should be able to create a bigger issue about it by going public with those names, phone numbers, and email addresses.


And here's a thought. If so many people were witness to an explosion down in the sub-levels, wouldn't it have been easier for the government to say that there was a secondary terrorist attack designed to weaken the substructure for when the planes hit the tower? Y'know, instead of threatening all these people and telling them to be quiet?

i guess you think yolo too..

To be honest, it sounds like you're talking about religion/god, not a terrorist attack. I am not choosing to believe two full loaded commercial airliners flew into the buildings, stripped off the thermal insulation and fireproofing, and sparked a fire that weakened the structural integrity of the remaining support columns, eventually causing the towers to collapse. These are facts.

Yes, for any one-off mega disaster, there will be a number of surprises to people in the scientific community. We don't have 12 past incidents to benchmark this one with unfortunately. But every idiot 'truther' tries to exploit and twist each individual surprise into something completely different.

There were tens of thousands of witnesses to the 9-11 attacks. If you take a sampling of ten thousand random Americans and look at what happened to them in the past decade, you will find all sorts of weird things. Some were arrested for various crimes, others died in a variety of mysterious ways, and some are going to be business people with interests abroad, or have unsavory political beliefs, etc. So it's pretty irrelevant, but it does make for good idiot fodder.

Regarding whether or not the US government knew about the attacks, or even somehow abetted them, who knows? I can't say for sure that wasn't the case - but none of you can say for sure it was.

There still hasn't been one factual thing said by the truther movement, that doesn't have a relatively simple explanation.

No, things couldn't be that simple. I mean, it's not like terrorists never detonated a bomb in the WTC sub-level garage before. Oh wait...

Y'know, I have no problems with discussing these events. If you go through the multiple threads started by +theone+ (gummetalteg), you'll see me right in the thick of them. If I think something doesn't make sense, I'll go out and research it. If I felt that the other person was correct, I'll admit it and adjust my views accordingly. If I felt they were wrong, I'd state it in such a way that allowed me to present my own side of things while having the data and information to back me up.

What I'm failing to see you and CIC do is exactly the latter. You guys love to present biased videos (remember, I used to create news clips and documentaries for a living... I know EXACTLY what a tilted video looks like) but when other refute them or ask for additional proof, the rest of you "truthers" either ignore it and go onto a different topic, or call us "sheeple" and say we're wrong without proving why.

If you guys really want to prove that the government was behind this or that there's a bigger conspiracy at play, then prove it and quit with the bullshit replies.

Sure, lets start with Rodriguez's testimony. The ball is in your court.

simpsons
http://bp1.blogger.com/_FZpxPLnjqs0/...A/s400/911.jpg

terminator
http://www.thinkorbeeaten.com/thekno...11overhead.jpg

illuminati card game 1995 http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_basraNod1M...nati+cards.jpg
there are many more..

Clinton couldn't keep a blowjob secret.


If there is one thing humans are really, really bad at, it's keeping secrets. Conspiritards are almost always very unhappy, socially awkward people with anger issues.

Look five posts up. I've already responded to the original post.

You do realize that the Empire State Building and the Twin Towers were what defined the New York skyline, right? A giant $9 on the cover next to the twin towers doesn't mean anything.

Because that couldn't simply refer to the height clearance for vehicles.

I'm sure I can go through a plethora of movies and find a bunch of signs and numbers that refer to July 17th. Just because they're there doesn't mean they're referring to anything in particular.

Explain to me why those two screen captures are significant and not simply coincidences that are taken out of context.

The Twin Towers and Pentagon have always been considered targets for terrorists. Remember, the Twin Towers were bombed back in '93, a couple years before that card set was produced. Hell, go through a dozen action movies or the Tom Clancy books and you'll find similarities in all of them as well.

So post 105 is your reply to his testimony... seems like you acknowledge the blast.


I didnt think so much spam would be posted in this thread, notably by dangonay and Blaupunkt69... this thread has my blessing to continue in the fight-club section.

Who's to dispute his experience? He was there and we weren't. We are, however, disputing his interpretation of the events.


As Lomac asked: Where are the emails? Who were the callers? Who told him not to talk about things? Additionally: Who are the family members and survivors who stand with him? Who else remembers the timeline as he does?

So a lack of acknowledgement or denial automatically means I agree? Is that how you see it?

Okay, no... I don't think there was a bomb blast. Perhaps his timeline was skewered. The initial blast he experience could have been the original plane hitting the tower, which knocked a service or express elevator down to the ground. And perhaps the second explosion her talks about was a gas main or something else, which was possibly severed, to go off.

My questions are why he hasn't tried bringing up specifics with the media, even if it's just PressTV or RT? As I said, he should have the phone numbers, email addresses and media contacts for all of those who told him to be quiet. I'm sure he could make a giant stink about all those people asking him to cover it up if he publicized it on air.

So why hasn't he?


How is it spam? Because it doesn't jive with your view?

Its spam because it deters people from reading walls of text which only leads to nowhere.
You havent watched the testimony, a few things you've mentioned were already addressed... if you really watched it (maybe you didnt pay attention) you'd be picking out the inconsistencies or calling him a liar.

Here he is on RT.

CiC, since it seems we keep missing the things that we bring up as arguments, how about you tell us where in each of those videos our questions are answered. Give us the time codes, please, since obviously as we went through them we missed them.

There is a set timeline, the basement explodes lifting him and then the upper explosion occurs. There are other people with him which some are severally injured.
The stoves in the building are electric.

here's the thing to you coincidences are just coincidences, to me one coincidence is ok.. 2 is getting somewhere.. 3 ......... but there's so many more for this and there's illuminati symbolism in most movies. Is that coincidence too?

Actually I did watch it all. I'm merely speculating and postulating my own opinions on what he claims he experienced. As I said, I don't believe there was a bomb in the lower levels. And if there truly was, wouldn't it have been easier for the government to say it was done by terrorists? Why go through all that trouble to pin the plane attack on Al Quaeda, then cover up an explosion down below?

And again, why hasn't he talked about the people who are telling him to be quiet?

I'm not quite sure what other points he brings up that we're supposed to discuss. The rest of his interviews are talking about him rescuing people, what he says he experienced, and how he's been told to be quiet about it.

i don't get it.

one side believe's there's a conspiracy, and that everything we have access to is basically lies and deceit.


one side says they want proof, and use all available proof that is released to the public.


isn't it kind of a redundant argument?

if the conspiracy theorists are even slightly right, then it means all the proof everyone else has is wrong/lied/made up and real proof cannot be found. you'd have to basically hammer at it till you get someone to admit it. basically it's the same as faith, you have to accept it in your mind, or you have to accept reality, either way both have no proof if you take the stance of the opposition.


basically, one side is questioning the proof... and one side tells them to prove the proof is wrong with more proof.


you don't need proof for everything. proof can be created. hindsight is always 20/20.

you don't need to be a smarty pants to figure out something fishy/shady is going on with the whole thing. by whole thing i mean the whole war and basically, how everything is run at a national/global scale.


i don't know about the actual details like oh the molecular structure of the building blah blah blah.

all i know is, somewhere up the line of the global chain of command, 9/11 was known and welcomed with open arms. it was planned and known by both sides.

how they pulled it off, we will never know the details, the details don't matter. only the intent matters. the mechanics behind it could be any of the near infinite probabilities (if it wasn't method A, then it's B. or C. or D etc. doesnt matter).

Now we're getting somewhere.
You're saying he and a group of other survivors are lying then! So the man who may have saved over a thousand people was in cahoots with Binladin all along right?
Even if you might think something blew up after the plane crash, what would cause it? show me facts rather then saying something like... electric gas lines.

Show us the facts, Chuck. Other than this man's testimony, what facts do you have?

If an elevator cable broke and it fell 50+ floors and crashed at the bottom of the elevator shaft, it would absolutely sound like a bomb. It would probably blow the doors off like a muthafucka!