Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
It means quite a bit if there were explosives in there, covered up by the 'official' investigation.

You haven't even convinced yourself yet...why should others believe this fairy tale ?

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

  • Replies 367
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
It means quite a bit if there were explosives in there, covered up by the 'official' investigation.
There is no direct evidence of explosives. The evidence you quote is indirect evidence that might indicate the presence of explosives. It is inconclusive and means nothing without direct evidence of the plot that would have been required to plant the alledged explosives.

To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.

Posted (edited)
There is no direct evidence of explosives. The evidence you quote is indirect evidence that might indicate the presence of explosives. It is inconclusive and means nothing without direct evidence of the plot that would have been required to plant the alledged explosives.

Oh I think the presence of sophisticated explosives in several different samples means quite a lot.

A lot of people have spent a lot of time 'debunking' the idea that any explosives were present.

Well ... explosives were present, highly sophisticated ones not on the market and not easily available.

Read the report. It's linked somewhere above.

It certainly demands explanation.

This is the conclusion of Professor Niels Harrit in the Danish TV2 interview when asked about “9-11 conspiracy theories”: “I think there is only one conspiracy theory worth mentioning, the one involving 19 hijackers. I think viewers should ask themselves what evidence they have seen to support the official conspiracy theory. If anyone has seen evidence, I would like to hear about it. No-one has been formally charged. No-one is ‘wanted’. Our work should lead to demands for a proper criminal investigation of the 9/11 terrorist attack. Because it never happened. We are still waiting for it. We hope our results will be used as technical evidence when that day comes. “

Edited by tango

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples. Love it or leave it, eh! Peace.

Posted
Oh I think the presence of sophisticated explosives in several different samples means quite a lot.

Read the report. It's linked somewhere above.

It means nothing without physical context and authenticity, not to mention peer challenges.

Would you convict a man based on this single report?

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
Oh I think the presence of sophisticated explosives in several different samples means quite a lot.
What was found was residues that could have come from explosives. There is no direct evidence of explosives. There is a huge difference.

To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.

Posted (edited)
It means nothing without physical context and authenticity, not to mention peer challenges.

Would you convict a man based on this single report?

Nobody's convicting anybody.

Just calling for proper investigation, which has never been done.

Why is the mainstream north american media so silent, when this news is streaking around the world?

-eta-

Here's some testimony from people ...

http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat=19...001604091459631

His two-and-a-half-hour presentation at the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship was chock full of video interviews with first responders and cleanup workers who were on the scene describing explosions before the building collapses. Kevin McPadden, a former Air Force medic and a 9/11 first responder, had this to say in a video interview: "You heard explosions, like ba-boom!, a distinct sound, not like floors collapsing. ... You felt a rumble in the ground like you wanted to grab onto something. To me, I knew that that was an explosion." Gage says that 118 other first responders described similar sounds of explosions in 9/11 oral histories published in The New York Times.

Edited by tango

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples. Love it or leave it, eh! Peace.

Posted
Here's some testimony from people ...
I said earlier that we need testimony from people who actually participated in the placing of the alleged bombs. That is direct evidence. Testimony from witnesses that think they might have heard something that might have been a bomb going off is more circumstantial evidence.

To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.

Posted (edited)
I said earlier that we need testimony from people who actually participated in the placing of the alleged bombs. That is direct evidence. Testimony from witnesses that think they might have heard something that might have been a bomb going off is more circumstantial evidence.

YOU may need such evidence, but some of us can see a picture emerging that definitely calls for a more unbiased investigation than was already done.

That's the only point here, that a proper investigation needs to be done.

There were not just residues, but unexploded debris as well, clearly identifiable as thermite, which you would know if you read the report.

Often dismissed as a conspiracy theorist, Gage says, "First let the technical truths emerge, then if necessary, cope with the conspiracies and other questions."

Edited by tango

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples. Love it or leave it, eh! Peace.

Posted (edited)
That's the only point here, that a proper investigation needs to be done.
Why? The majority of people don't seem to think so.
There were not just residues, but unexploded debris as well, clearly identifiable as thermite, which you would know if you read the report.
I have been over all of this stuff when Polynewbie was here. The entire argument is basically 'we found this stuff that could mean explosives. We can't think of anything else it could be so we will assert that it is explosives'. The fact they have no way to prove they did not fake all of evidence in first place makes the case even weaker. The entire case would be ripped to shreds in seconds by any half competent defense attorney.

If this conspiracy did, in fact, occur there would be participants that would know enough details to make them credible. No such witnesses have emerged. That makes the claim highly improbable.

Edited by Riverwind

To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.

Posted

tango,

Well, after two towers have come down, what's another?

http://www.wtc7.net/background.html

At the time of its destruction, it exclusively housed government agencies and financial institutions. It contained offices of the IRS, Secret Service, and SEC.

See, that's just not true.

From the exact same site, there's a tenants list that shows financial organizations such as AmEx were tenants.

wtc 7

Posted

tango,

Nothing is proven, but the facts are becoming difficult to explain away.

And see my post above re 'maybe it has happened before'.

It just takes time to catch up with all the pro-conspiracy truther sites.... I remember when this stuff first came out, they made outlandish claims. By the time those were all explained away, they had gone off and made more claims.

They quietly re-edit 'Loose Change' to remove the inaccuracies, version after version, but they never ever acknowledge that they were wrong.

My experience with the sources of these theories (not the folks on these boards) is that they're extremely intellectually dishonest.

Posted

Gotta kick out of this quote from that link.

How curious that on the day of the attack, Guiliani and his entourage set up shop in a different headquarters, abandoning the special bunker designed precisely for such an event. 3

Who builds a bunker on the 23rd floor of anything?

"Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC

Posted (edited)
tango,

It just takes time to catch up with all the pro-conspiracy truther sites.... I remember when this stuff first came out, they made outlandish claims. By the time those were all explained away, they had gone off and made more claims.

They quietly re-edit 'Loose Change' to remove the inaccuracies, version after version, but they never ever acknowledge that they were wrong.

My experience with the sources of these theories (not the folks on these boards) is that they're extremely intellectually dishonest.

This is a brand new report, authored by several academics with good credentials, in a respectable peer-reviewed journal.

It is analysis of a variety of donated dust samples from the WTC collapse, pretty hard data and can be replicated by independent researchers.

It is certainly worth demanding a more complete and unbiased investigation than has been done to date.

Our soldiers are still dying in Afghanistan because of this. We owe them the truth.

Edited by tango

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples. Love it or leave it, eh! Peace.

Posted
This is a brand new report, authored by several academics with good credentials, in a respectable peer-reviewed journal.

I'm sure then it will be roundly dismissed. No controls over samples that were turned over to a known tr00ther by anonymous doners....

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted (edited)
I'm sure then it will be roundly dismissed. No controls over samples that were turned over to a known tr00ther by anonymous doners....

It's obvious you are not interested in learning the truth.

Edited by tango

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples. Love it or leave it, eh! Peace.

Posted
And if pigs had wings they could fly.

In God We Trust...all others bring real data/evidence...not wild ass guesses please.

Since you have to have faith to beleive and trust in this thing called God .... why should enything be proved to someone like you who beleives in a God with no proof of said god?

No god, no trust .. more towers are going to fall.

Micheal H.

They quietly re-edit 'Loose Change' to remove the inaccuracies, version after version, but they never ever acknowledge that they were wrong.

I will agree with you here. I have also stated in a couple other 9/11 threads that Loose Change is the worst piece put together to support the inside job theory. It is terrible, there are better documentaries out there that can show with better proof and show the logic behind the inside job angle.

See, that's just not true. (responding to

At the time of its destruction, it exclusively housed government agencies and financial institutions. It contained offices of the IRS, Secret Service, and SEC. )

From the exact same site, there's a tenants list that shows financial organizations such as AmEx were tenants.

I thought AmEx WAS a financial institution. Or is a credit card company not considered a financial institution?

My experience with the sources of these theories (not the folks on these boards) is that they're extremely intellectually dishonest.

There are intellectually dishonest people that support the official story as well.

Posted

Buldings like NO. SEVEN - do not just fall to the ground when there is a small fire on one of the upper floors - High rise buildings burn - and NOT one in the world has ever tumbled in such a manner..no one! So what's with this thing? Sure the World Trade Centre was hit by planes...and sure their were fanatics aboard who for the most part might have just as well been manipulated mentally into doing this task - and sure the Saudi Princes financed the deal - and sure OUR oil men administration allowed these fags to kill 3000 people for sport - and sure....an industry based on terror emerged - and sure Bush and Cheney got caught off guard...AND SURE THEY WERE COWARDS AND NEVER FOLLOWED THE BUCK BACH TO SAUDI ARABIA - AND maybe the Saudis had some dirt on these old executives - like man boy sex - who knows what the hell really went down - I say black mail.

Posted
It's obvious you are not interested in learning the truth.

Yes that's it....just I don't want tr00th handed to me on a tin foil platter but the looney tunes crew....

But for those who readily digest every fruitcake conspiracy theory regardless of how nonsensical it is...bon apetite

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted
Yes that's it....just I don't want tr00th handed to me on a tin foil platter but the looney tunes crew....

But for those who readily digest every fruitcake conspiracy theory regardless of how nonsensical it is...bon apetite

Have you read the full report?

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples. Love it or leave it, eh! Peace.

Posted
Since you have to have faith to beleive and trust in this thing called God .... why should enything be proved to someone like you who beleives in a God with no proof of said god

Sure...I believe in "God"....he lives about 93,000,000 miles from my house and fuses hydrogen and helium into heavier elements.

No god, no trust .. more towers are going to fall.

You have discovered gravity...again?

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
Have you read the full report?

I read enough to dismiss it.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted
This is a brand new report, authored by several academics with good credentials, in a respectable peer-reviewed journal.

It is analysis of a variety of donated dust samples from the WTC collapse, pretty hard data and can be replicated by independent researchers.

It is certainly worth demanding a more complete and unbiased investigation than has been done to date.

Our soldiers are still dying in Afghanistan because of this. We owe them the truth.

Hi tango,

I respect that these are academics, and that this paper is better than most I've read on the topic. The donated dust samples are a problem, though.

And, even if it turns out that there was such a chemical - what of it ? We can't go anywhere from there.

Posted
Hi tango,

I respect that these are academics, and that this paper is better than most I've read on the topic. The donated dust samples are a problem, though.

And, even if it turns out that there was such a chemical - what of it ? We can't go anywhere from there.

Yes it is a good report, and these are credible professionals.

A full, independent investigation would be a good place to go from there.

My Canada includes rights of Indigenous Peoples. Love it or leave it, eh! Peace.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,923
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Jordan Parish
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • TheUnrelentingPopulous earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • LinkSoul60 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • MDP earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • MDP earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • LinkSoul60 went up a rank
      Enthusiast
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...