Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 384
  1. #76
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    41,654
    Twoofers,

    Why would the govt go to such great lengths to "stage" a terrorist attack, when precedent had already been established in 1993 using a fertilizer truck bomb? Doesn't really make any sense? Then again, none of your theories do.

  2. #77
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    Twoofers,

    Why would the govt go to such great lengths to "stage" a terrorist attack, when precedent had already been established in 1993 using a fertilizer truck bomb? Doesn't really make any sense? Then again, none of your theories do.
    Damn, he probably has problems with that account too. Don't make him lose focus more than he already has.

  3. #78
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    Apologists for the government insist that there is so little debris at the crash site in Shanksville because the plane crashed into an abandoned mine shaft!

    Well, we know what to do with miners trapped in mine shafts: We bring out the heavy equipment and work non-stop in the hope that someone may have miraculously survived. But that was not done in Shanksville.


    lol mineshaft.

    Publicly rescind your faulty and misleading characterization, "Jim Fetzer" -- then I'll be more inclined to believe you are interested in the truth. Admit it here, then correct yourself on the web page you linked with annotation explaining what you changed and why you needed to correct that error and that an anonymous nobody on a basketball message board showed you how wrong you were.

  4. #79
    Believe.
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Post Count
    31
    You come across as a pimply-faced teen ager who is desperately trying to come across as "macho" because of profound feelings of insecurity. What have you even done for your country, such as serving in the Armed Forces of the United States? Indeed, what have you even done of any significance in any context whatsoever, other than post tripe on this forum and try to make yourself look smart? That is a losing proposition, as you demonstrate here.

    You may be the only person who believes Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville. The two reporters on the scene both said in their reports (independently) that the errie aspect of the crash site was that there was no evidence that any plane had crashed there. The officials on the scene kept photographers and reporters 1,000 yards away. No effort was made to recover bodies by bringing out the bright lights and heavy equipment, as would be done in a mining accident.

    The coroner reported that he ceased functioning as a medical examiner after 15 minutes because there were no bodies. He said he had not seen even a single speck of blood. Bushes and trees that had been singed were trimmed to make sure they could not be subjected to chemical analysis to see if they had been burned by jet fuel based fires. The EPA would later study the soil to determine if there was any jet fuel residue--and concluded there was not.

    So what is a punk like you doing making cheap shots toward those of us who are dedicating our lives to exposing the corruption of 9/11 and other acts of violence upon the American people? You have clearly not read my articles, which are important, not because they are mine, but because I marshall the relevant evidence that matters to the issues I am discussing. But that makes no difference to someone like you, who is out to bolster his ego before a tiny group of friends and could care less about his country or 9/11 truth.



    lol mineshaft.

    Publicly rescind your faulty and misleading characterization, "Jim Fetzer" -- then I'll be more inclined to believe you are interested in the truth. Admit it here, then correct yourself on the web page you linked with annotation explaining what you changed and why you needed to correct that error and that an anonymous nobody on a basketball message board showed you how wrong you were.

  5. #80
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    You come across as a pimply-faced teen ager who is desperately trying to come across as "macho" because of profound feelings of insecurity. What have you even done for your country, such as serving in the Armed Forces of the United States? Indeed, what have you even done of any significance in any context whatsoever, other than post tripe on this forum and try to make yourself look smart? That is a losing proposition, as you demonstrate here.
    You come across as something other than a learned scholar doing serious research intent on changing the hearts and minds of Americans who have legitimate questions for you. Are ad hominem attacks something you do as a matter of course? Do you do this on radio and television?

    You may be the only person who believes Flight 93 crashed in Shanksville.
    I'm going to say there are no fewer than many millions of people who believe Flight 93 crashed outside of Shanksville.

    The two reporters on the scene both said in their reports (independently) that the errie aspect of the crash site was that there was no evidence that any plane had crashed there.
    Because the plane disintegrated on impact. Had you actually done any real research you would know there is quite a similar crash on record with remarkably the same kind of crash site and debris field.

    The officials on the scene kept photographers and reporters 1,000 yards away. No effort was made to recover bodies by bringing out the bright lights and heavy equipment, as would be done in a mining accident.
    Again, you are laboring under the false assumption that this was a shaft mine. It was a strip mine that had been reclaimed. If you don't know this simple fact, you can't be taken seriously.

    The coroner reported that he ceased functioning as a medical examiner after 15 minutes because there were no bodies. He said he had not seen even a single speck of blood.
    How many intact bodies do you expect to find when a plane hits the ground at a 40 degree angle at 563 mph? There were no intact bodies found in the other flight I referred to and you have apparently never heard of.

    Bushes and trees that had been singed were trimmed to make sure they could not be subjected to chemical analysis to see if they had been burned by jet fuel based fires.
    Entire trees would have to be removed to effect that.

    The EPA would later study the soil to determine if there was any jet fuel residue--and concluded there was not.
    Wouldn't expect much.



    So what is a punk like you doing making cheap shots toward those of us who are dedicating our lives to exposing the corruption of 9/11 and other acts of violence upon the American people?
    If you are indeed Jim Fetzer, I think you are dedicating your life to your own minor celebrity and will never commit to an actual comprehensive theory because you'd rather work on the fringes and take in suckers who will pay to listen to your innuendo and read your sloppy, fake research.

    You have clearly not read my articles, which are important, not because they are mine, but because I marshall the relevant evidence that matters to the issues I am discussing.
    "Jim" -- we are discussing the errors of your article right now. How could I know that you grossly mischaracterized the Shanksville site as a mine shaft if I didn't read the article in which you wrote that lie?

    But that makes no difference to someone like you, who is out to bolster his ego before a tiny group of friends and could care less about his country or 9/11 truth.
    I am very interested in 9/11 truth -- so much so that I ask people who doubt the official narrative to provide an alternative so people can see what people like you really believe and decide for themselves what they want to believe.

    You, along with every other truther I have ever seen, proved to be incapable of providing such a narrative after a full decade of "research" and self-pimping on the internets and radio and television. If you are truly doing this for your country, you have failed miserably and there's no use getting pissy and blaming me for your lack of intellectual ability or communication skills.

  6. #81
    i hunt fenced animals clambake's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    25,029
    pimply faced teenager lol

  7. #82
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    pimply faced teenager lol
    I think he used that one on Hannity, too.

  8. #83
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590


    lol mineshaft.

    Publicly rescind your faulty and misleading characterization, "Jim Fetzer" -- then I'll be more inclined to believe you are interested in the truth. Admit it here, then correct yourself on the web page you linked with annotation explaining what you changed and why you needed to correct that error and that an anonymous nobody on a basketball message board showed you how wrong you were.
    Seriously Jim -- I actually believe you are who you say you are. I must admit I didn't expect you to be as thin-skinned and petty as you turned out to be, but in retrospect is does explain the behavior of the truthers I know who are not minor celebrities. You're all alike in that respect.

    If the truth really is important to you, you will correct the very basic and very easily disproved error you made characterizing the Shanksville crash site as a shaft mine.

    All you need to do is say you were wrong about that; that the site is a reclaimed strip mine.

    If you don't, I will mercilessly beat you over the head with it as long as you are on this board. It is such a basic and glaring error that no researcher would ever want to make it in the first place, much less let it continue to exist on the internets, just waiting to be seized upon by punks on basketball message boards who will use it to show anyone who reads that you are at best a terrible researcher or at worst a terrible liar.

    The ball is in your court, Jim.

  9. #84
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    at whomever is trolling Chumpy.....

    Nice job.

  10. #85
    Boring = 4 Rings SA210's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Post Count
    14,286
    at whomever is trolling Chumpy.....

    Nice job.
    It is Epic indeed

  11. #86
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    Not the real Jim Fetzer but...

    The Shanksville eyewitness


    the best part is that Chumpy won't watch this either...


  12. #87
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    An (real) eyewitness who says first of all that this was no passenger plane that crashed in Shanksville, but also that the plane could not have been possibly been flying as fast as eyewitness Chumpy claims it was flying when it slammed into the ground...



    Unless planes can go from almost nothing to over 500mph there is something wrong with the official Chumpy theory...

    and it gets worse...



    Yes, the crater that officials claim was made by the crash of United 93 was already there before the crash according to a geological survey...

  13. #88
    Believe. Vici's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    542
    Since im assuming the truther movement is supposed to be base on scientific data... how much credence to scientists give witnesses? Ill give you a hint, the answer starts with an N and ends in ONE.

  14. #89
    Believe.
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Post Count
    31
    The government has claimed that there is no visible plane because it simply disappeared into the ground, which was soft from mining in the area, Chumpy. Some have suggested that it disappeared into an abandoned mining shaft. It is not a stretch. There is no way to believe that a Boeing 757 crashed here. How else could a plane COMPLETELY DISAPPEAR and leave no signs at all? And Pilots has shown that it was over Urbana, IL, at the time it allegedly crashed. You just dismiss or ignore the evidence that shows you are wrong.

    I don't want to suggest that you are gullible, but for someone to swallow the "official account" of 9/11 when all of the evidence contradicts it takes a weak mind, not a strong one. You seem too smart to be so easily taken in. It's not being "thin skinned" but having no patience for absurdities. I have often noted that the "official account" is just fine as long as you are willing to believe impossible things. Why are you not seeing through the fantasies we have been told re 9/11? Here's a sampler of the problems with the OCT:

    1. The impact of planes cannot have caused enough damage to bring the buildings down, since the buildings were designed to withstand them (as Frank DeMartini, the project manager, has observed), the planes alleged to have hit were similar to those they were designed to withstand, and the buildings continued to stand after those impacts with negligible effects.

    2. Most of the jet fuel, principally kerosene, burned up in those fireballs in the first fifteen seconds or so. Below the 96th floor in the North Tower and the 80th in the South, those buildings were stone cold steel (unaffected by any fires at all other than some very modest office fires that burned around 500 degrees F), which functioned as a massive heat sink dissipating the heat from building up on the steel.

    3. The melting point of steel at 2,800 degrees F is about 1,000 degrees higher than the maximum burning temperature of jet-fuel-based fires, which do not exceed 1,800 degrees F under optimal conditions; but the NIST examined 236 samples of steel and found that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500 degrees F and the others not above 
1200.

    4. Underwriters Laboratory certified the steel in the buildings up to 2,000 degrees F for three or four hours without any significant effects, where these fires burned neither long enough or hot enough at an average temperature of about 500 degrees for about one hour in the South Tower and one and a half in the North Tower to weaken, much less melt.

    5. If the steel had melted or weakened, then the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior, with some degree of asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow, not the complete, abrupt and total demolition that was observed. Which means the NIST cannot even explain the initiation of any 
”collapse” sequence.

    6. The top 30 floors of the South Tower pivoted and fell to the side, turning to dust before it reached the horizontal. So it did not even exist to exert any downward pressure on the lower 80 floors. A high-school physics teacher, Charles Boldwyn, moreover, has calculated that, if you take the top 16 floors of the North Tower as one unit of downward force, there were 199 units of upward force to counteract it.

    7. William Rodriguez, who was the senior custodian in the North Tower and the last man to leave the building, has reported massive explosions in the sub-basements that effected extensive destruction, including the demolition of a fifty-ton hydraulic press and the 
ripping of the skin off a fellow worker, where they filled with water that drained the sprinkler system.

    8. Rodriguez observed that the explosion occurred prior to reverberations from upper floors, a claim that has now been substantiated in a new study by Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross, ”Seismic Proof: 9/11 Was an Inside Job,” demonstrating that these 
explosions actually took place as much as 14 and 17 seconds before the presumptive airplane impacts.

    9. Heavy-steel-construction buildings like the Twin Towers are not generally capable of “pancake collapse,” which normally occurs only with concrete structures of “lift slab construction” and could not occur in redundant welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting column were removed at the same time, floor by floor, as Charles Pegelow, a structural engineer, has observed.

    10. The demolition of the two towers in about 10 seconds apiece is very close to the speed of free fall with only air resistance, which Judy Wood, Ph.D., formerly a professor of mechanical engineering, has observed is an astounding result that would be impossible with extremely powerful sources of energy. If they were collapsing, they would have had to fall through their points of greatest resistance.

    11. Indeed, the towers are exploding from the top, not collapsing to the ground, where their floors do not move, a phenomenon Wood has likened to two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down, which, like the pulverization of the buildings, the government’s account cannot possibly explain. There were no “pancakes”.

    12. WTC-7 came down in a classic controlled demolition at 5:20 PM after Larry Silverstein suggested the best thing to do might be to “pull it”, displaying all the characteristics of classic controlled demolitions: a complete, abrupt and total collapse into its own footprint, where the floors are all falling at the same time, yielding a stack of pancakes about 5 floors high.

    13. Had the Twin Towers collapsed like WTC-7, there would have been two stacks of “pancakes” equal to about 12% the height of the buildings or around 15 floors high. But they were actually reduced to below ground level. Since there were no “pancakes”, there cannot have been any “pancake collapse” of either building, where the buildings were destroyed by different modes of demolition.

    14. The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44-feet above the ground; the debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, which means that the official account is not true.

    15. The Pentagon’s own videotapes do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O’Reilly admitted when one was shown on ”The O’Reilly Factor”; at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been present and easily visible; it was not, which means that the video evidence also contradicts the official account.

    16. The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory “flying at high speed barely above ground level” physically impossible, because a Boeing 757 flying over 500 mph could not have come closer than about 60 feet of the ground, which means that the official account is not even aerodynamically possible, as Nila Sagadevan, an aeronautical engineer, explained to me.

    17. Data from a flight recorder provided to Pilots for 9/11 Truth by the National Transportation Safety Board corresponds to a plane with a different approach and al ude, which would have precluded its hitting lampposts or even the building itself, which means that, if this data corresponds to a Boeing 757, it would have flown over the Pentagon rather than hit it.

    18. If Flight 93 crashed into an abandoned mine shaft, as the government maintains, then they should have brought out the heavy equipment and the bright lights and dug and dug, 24/7, in the hope that, by some miracle, someone might possibly have survived. But nothing like that was done. Even the singed trees and shrubs were trimmed, apparently to make it impossible to subject them to chemical analysis.

    19. There is more, especially about the alleged hijackers, including that they were not competent to fly these planes and their names are not on any original, authenticated passenger manifest. Several have turned up alive and well and living in the Middle East. The government has not even produced their tickets as evidence that they were even aboard the aircraft they are alleged to have hijacked.

    20. President Bush recently acknowledged that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. The Senate Intelligence Committee has reported that Saddam was not in cahoots with Al Qaeda. And the FBI has acknowledged that it has “no hard evidence” to tie Osama to 9/11. If Saddam did not do it and Osama did not do it, then who is responsible for the death of 3,000 citizens that day?

    We believe that it is the highest form of respect to those who died on 9/11 and their survivors to establish how and why they died, which our own government manifestly has not done. With the American media under the thumb of a corrupt administration, we cannot count on the press to perform its investigative function. But we can do our best to expose falsehoods and reveal truths about 9/11.

    For more, see http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/09...-911-is-wrong/

    Seriously Jim -- I actually believe you are who you say you are. I must admit I didn't expect you to be as thin-skinned and petty as you turned out to be, but in retrospect is does explain the behavior of the truthers I know who are not minor celebrities. You're all alike in that respect.

    If the truth really is important to you, you will correct the very basic and very easily disproved error you made characterizing the Shanksville crash site as a shaft mine.

    All you need to do is say you were wrong about that; that the site is a reclaimed strip mine.

    If you don't, I will mercilessly beat you over the head with it as long as you are on this board. It is such a basic and glaring error that no researcher would ever want to make it in the first place, much less let it continue to exist on the internets, just waiting to be seized upon by punks on basketball message boards who will use it to show anyone who reads that you are at best a terrible researcher or at worst a terrible liar.

    The ball is in your court, Jim.

  15. #90
    Believe.
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Post Count
    31
    My opinion is that Chumpy and others here really could care less about 9/11 or our nation's future and recent past. What they care about is mocking those of us who do. That is what they consider to be "cool". But the government has been lying to us about major events on a regular basis. The latest is this "underwear bomber" who was working for the CIA. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...orking-for-cia What's the likelihood that a "bomber" who was working for the CIA posed a genuine threat rather than was working a scam on us?

    And I did what I could to explain to Ed Schultz how we know that Saddam Hussein was taken out on 7 April 2003 by USAF B-1 bomber pilot Chris Wachter, but he didn't bring me back on the air after asking me to say on so we could learn "the rest of the story", where even the few minutes I was on was "scrubbed" from the archives for his show. On Monday, he came on the air and, without identifying me by name, began attacking those who believe Bush and Cheney should be tried for war crimes as "conspiracy theorists". See http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/05...y-and-a-fraud/

    I agree with Michael Moore who, when asked, "Do you believe in conspiracy theories?", replied, "Only those that are true!" Where you have to study the evidence in order to sort out which are true and which are false. Those of us who do are conspiracy realists, where JFK, 9/11, and Wellstone are the three I have studied most extensively. I must ask, were you taken in by the second death of Osama bin Laden? There has been a lot about it on the air, where Obama is making it one of the centerpieces of his campaign for reelection. Do you believe he was killed in a compound in Pakistan about one year ago? Here's an article about him, http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2011...1957-2001.html but I don't think you care.
    Last edited by Jim Fetzer; 05-09-2012 at 08:43 AM.

  16. #91
    Damns (Given): 0 Blake's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    76,234
    The government has claimed that there is no visible plane because it simply disappeared into the ground, which was soft from mining in the area, Chumpy. Some have suggested that it disappeared into an abandoned mining shaft. It is not a stretch. There is no way to believe that a Boeing 757 crashed here. How else could a plane COMPLETELY DISAPPEAR and leave no signs at all? And Pilots has shown that it was over Urbana, IL, at the time it allegedly crashed. You just dismiss or ignore the evidence that shows you are wrong.

    I don't want to suggest that you are gullible, but for someone to swallow the "official account" of 9/11 when all of the evidence contradicts it takes a weak mind, not a strong one. You seem too smart to be so easily taken in. It's not being "thin skinned" but having no patience for absurdities. I have often noted that the "official account" is just fine as long as you are willing to believe impossible things. Why are you not seeing through the fantasies we have been told re 9/11? Here's a sampler of the problems with the OCT:

    1. The impact of planes cannot have caused enough damage to bring the buildings down, since the buildings were designed to withstand them (as Frank DeMartini, the project manager, has observed), the planes alleged to have hit were similar to those they were designed to withstand, and the buildings continued to stand after those impacts with negligible effects.

    2. Most of the jet fuel, principally kerosene, burned up in those fireballs in the first fifteen seconds or so. Below the 96th floor in the North Tower and the 80th in the South, those buildings were stone cold steel (unaffected by any fires at all other than some very modest office fires that burned around 500 degrees F), which functioned as a massive heat sink dissipating the heat from building up on the steel.

    3. The melting point of steel at 2,800 degrees F is about 1,000 degrees higher than the maximum burning temperature of jet-fuel-based fires, which do not exceed 1,800 degrees F under optimal conditions; but the NIST examined 236 samples of steel and found that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500 degrees F and the others not above 
1200.

    4. Underwriters Laboratory certified the steel in the buildings up to 2,000 degrees F for three or four hours without any significant effects, where these fires burned neither long enough or hot enough at an average temperature of about 500 degrees for about one hour in the South Tower and one and a half in the North Tower to weaken, much less melt.

    5. If the steel had melted or weakened, then the affected floors would have displayed completely different behavior, with some degree of asymmetrical sagging and tilting, which would have been gradual and slow, not the complete, abrupt and total demolition that was observed. Which means the NIST cannot even explain the initiation of any 
”collapse” sequence.

    6. The top 30 floors of the South Tower pivoted and fell to the side, turning to dust before it reached the horizontal. So it did not even exist to exert any downward pressure on the lower 80 floors. A high-school physics teacher, Charles Boldwyn, moreover, has calculated that, if you take the top 16 floors of the North Tower as one unit of downward force, there were 199 units of upward force to counteract it.

    7. William Rodriguez, who was the senior custodian in the North Tower and the last man to leave the building, has reported massive explosions in the sub-basements that effected extensive destruction, including the demolition of a fifty-ton hydraulic press and the 
ripping of the skin off a fellow worker, where they filled with water that drained the sprinkler system.

    8. Rodriguez observed that the explosion occurred prior to reverberations from upper floors, a claim that has now been substantiated in a new study by Craig Furlong and Gordon Ross, ”Seismic Proof: 9/11 Was an Inside Job,” demonstrating that these 
explosions actually took place as much as 14 and 17 seconds before the presumptive airplane impacts.

    9. Heavy-steel-construction buildings like the Twin Towers are not generally capable of “pancake collapse,” which normally occurs only with concrete structures of “lift slab construction” and could not occur in redundant welded-steel buildings, such as the towers, unless every supporting column were removed at the same time, floor by floor, as Charles Pegelow, a structural engineer, has observed.

    10. The demolition of the two towers in about 10 seconds apiece is very close to the speed of free fall with only air resistance, which Judy Wood, Ph.D., formerly a professor of mechanical engineering, has observed is an astounding result that would be impossible with extremely powerful sources of energy. If they were collapsing, they would have had to fall through their points of greatest resistance.

    11. Indeed, the towers are exploding from the top, not collapsing to the ground, where their floors do not move, a phenomenon Wood has likened to two gigantic trees turning to sawdust from the top down, which, like the pulverization of the buildings, the government’s account cannot possibly explain. There were no “pancakes”.

    12. WTC-7 came down in a classic controlled demolition at 5:20 PM after Larry Silverstein suggested the best thing to do might be to “pull it”, displaying all the characteristics of classic controlled demolitions: a complete, abrupt and total collapse into its own footprint, where the floors are all falling at the same time, yielding a stack of pancakes about 5 floors high.

    13. Had the Twin Towers collapsed like WTC-7, there would have been two stacks of “pancakes” equal to about 12% the height of the buildings or around 15 floors high. But they were actually reduced to below ground level. Since there were no “pancakes”, there cannot have been any “pancake collapse” of either building, where the buildings were destroyed by different modes of demolition.

    14. The hit point at the Pentagon was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125-foot wingspan and a tail that stands 44-feet above the ground; the debris was wrong for a Boeing 757: no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines were recovered, which means that the official account is not true.

    15. The Pentagon’s own videotapes do not show a Boeing 757 hitting the building, as even Bill O’Reilly admitted when one was shown on ”The O’Reilly Factor”; at 155 feet, the plane was more than twice as long as the 77-foot Pentagon is high and should have been present and easily visible; it was not, which means that the video evidence also contradicts the official account.

    16. The aerodynamics of flight would have made the official trajectory “flying at high speed barely above ground level” physically impossible, because a Boeing 757 flying over 500 mph could not have come closer than about 60 feet of the ground, which means that the official account is not even aerodynamically possible, as Nila Sagadevan, an aeronautical engineer, explained to me.

    17. Data from a flight recorder provided to Pilots for 9/11 Truth by the National Transportation Safety Board corresponds to a plane with a different approach and al ude, which would have precluded its hitting lampposts or even the building itself, which means that, if this data corresponds to a Boeing 757, it would have flown over the Pentagon rather than hit it.

    18. If Flight 93 crashed into an abandoned mine shaft, as the government maintains, then they should have brought out the heavy equipment and the bright lights and dug and dug, 24/7, in the hope that, by some miracle, someone might possibly have survived. But nothing like that was done. Even the singed trees and shrubs were trimmed, apparently to make it impossible to subject them to chemical analysis.

    19. There is more, especially about the alleged hijackers, including that they were not competent to fly these planes and their names are not on any original, authenticated passenger manifest. Several have turned up alive and well and living in the Middle East. The government has not even produced their tickets as evidence that they were even aboard the aircraft they are alleged to have hijacked.

    20. President Bush recently acknowledged that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. The Senate Intelligence Committee has reported that Saddam was not in cahoots with Al Qaeda. And the FBI has acknowledged that it has “no hard evidence” to tie Osama to 9/11. If Saddam did not do it and Osama did not do it, then who is responsible for the death of 3,000 citizens that day?

    We believe that it is the highest form of respect to those who died on 9/11 and their survivors to establish how and why they died, which our own government manifestly has not done. With the American media under the thumb of a corrupt administration, we cannot count on the press to perform its investigative function. But we can do our best to expose falsehoods and reveal truths about 9/11.

    For more, see http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/09...-911-is-wrong/
    I was really hoping to hear a theory about who masterminded it all and a detailed story about how they pulled it off.

    Very disappointing.

  17. #92
    Believe.
    My Team
    Los Angeles Lakers
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Post Count
    31
    Nice example of the little (really, small, even tiny) games that are being played here. Blake could also care less. I have already offered a (partial and incomplete) "narrative" about the players and the motives that drove them in "9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda" (above). It can be arduous to conduct real research, but Chumpy, Blake, and others of their ilk are not about to expend themselves in reading any studies or evaluating any evidence when they can sit back and mock those of us who care about 9/11 and the future of our country.

    Notice how effortlessly he can dismiss proof that we have been sold a mess of pottage about 9/11 by our government. Does he expect to have notes from secret meetings where Cheney and Gen. Myers went into how the Air Force would be stood down on 9/11 so they could not attempt intercepts of planes that either were not even in the air or were at locations far removed from where they were alleged to have crashed or hit the Twin Towers? Given what I have experienced since I arrived, I am no longer surprised.

    Maybe you don't even recall, if you ever knew, that one of the first actions that Cheney took after he arrived in office was to arrange a meeting about "energy policy", where he brought together heavy hitters from the gas and oil industry, apparently to map out how they were going to divide Iraqi oil. He would not even allow the public to know the names of those who attended. So is that something else that I should include in my "narrative"? Lies can be short and simple. The truth, as in this case, can be elaborate and complex.

    So not only have I outlined the narrative that represents elements of the history of the planning to bring about 9/11 in order to instill fear into the American people with a "new Pearl Harbor" and manipulate us to promote a political agenda, but I have already observed that the tactic you and Chumpy seem to prefer is to insist that, unless we know everything about 9/11, we don't know anything. But neither or your buddies here even seem to care. For example, I have yet to see an acknowledgment of any of the points I've made--not one!

    I was really hoping to hear a theory about who masterminded it all and a detailed story about how they pulled it off.

    Very disappointing.
    Last edited by Jim Fetzer; 05-09-2012 at 09:00 AM.

  18. #93
    Student of Liberty Galileo's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Post Count
    5,967
    Fetzer being a Lakers fan denies all credibility, TBH.


    Fetzer's using ST to advertise his works. Shame on you, Fetzer .

    True academics do so though. "Here are all my references to others' works in my research study. Here is my credibility. Here is my hypothesis. To see my research methods and conclusion, please buy my book!"
    Fetzer is a big fan of Tim Duncan.


  19. #94
    Damns (Given): 0 Blake's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    76,234
    Nice example of the little (really, small, even tiny) games that are being played here. Blake could also care less.
    How much less could I care?


    instead of proof of Cheney having secret military meetings, how about something simpler........like connecting the dots between Cheney and Silverstein.

    Proof of such meetings between these two would be an added bonus. Thanks.

  20. #95
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    41,654
    I sometimes drop in on these threads out of pure, morbid curiosity (or boredom). I wonder -- why do Chump and RandomGuy engage these s?

    Meh, to each their own, I guess.


    Carry on.

  21. #96
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421

  22. #97
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    Fetzer's case for the "inside job" narrative relies more on merely plausible inferences from the "data set" than anything approaching "evidence". There is a vast rag bag of such inferences in the "self linked" Fetzer material....


    (Also, his claim that anyone who lacks his investigatory passion or fails to share his confidence in its results "does not care about 9/11," amuses and delights.)

  23. #98
    Damns (Given): 0 Blake's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Post Count
    76,234
    Fetzer's case for the "inside job" narrative relies more on merely plausible inferences from the "data set" than anything approaching "evidence". There is a vast rag bag of such inferences in the "self linked" Fetzer material....


    (Also, his claim that anyone who lacks his investigatory passion or fails to share his confidence in its results "does not care about 9/11," amuses and delights.)
    Par for the twoofer course

  24. #99
    I can live with it JoeChalupa's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    21,547
    This is why the political forum exists!

  25. #100
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    The government has claimed that there is no visible plane because it simply disappeared into the ground, which was soft from mining in the area, Chumpy. Some have suggested that it disappeared into an abandoned mining shaft.
    Who has claimed it was a mine shaft, "Jim"?

    Who?

    And why would a scholar interested in truth let that misconception stand, much less base his argument about a rescue operation on it?

    Tell us all you know it is not a shaft mine, that it is a reclaimed strip mine. That will help prove to me you are interested in the actual truth.

    You will not get away with avoiding this.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •