The Strongest Public Domain Evidence of 9-11 Fraud

[Truth B Knowncaptain of 100]

Blue, my offer still stands - my 2 hour 9/11 documentary would help you understand why 9/11 happened, who benefited, the motives, players and ultimate desired ends. But if you'd rather not know the truth, I understand - it's easier to believe the official story so you don't have to take action like we have and are.

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

So the carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc., were "in on it." How could they not have been if they were installing "bombs" (the original theory)? Hmmm. . .let's see, were the remodelers under contract with the Port Authority? Presumably, they were. And the remodeling company agreed to have its workers install explosives in the buildings--is that what you're saying? How much sense does that make? Let's say then the remodeling work was put out for bid, and XYZ Company was the winning bidder. They understood, in submitting their bid, the specific nature of the work to be done, including installing explosives in the three buildings. Would they want to be involved? Obviously not.
Let's say that a foreign company was contracted to do the work (Dr. Jones' theory), and there was no open bidding process (illegal). How do you suppose the NYC trades unions would look upon that? How could that be kept secret?

Even a cursory analysis of the foregoing explanations are studies in absurdity. That's apropos, inasmuch as the entire 9/11 conspiracy theory is a study in absurdity.

The companies, and security firms involved in "renovations" at WTC must be thoroughly investigated. As was already mentioned, Bush's family members were on the boards of companies overseeing security at WTC AND at the airport from which alleged "hijackers" allegedly took off.


The point is that we have proven Controlled Demolition beyond reasonable doubt (note I say REASONABLE as in HONEST, and not paid government troll, or a person who does not comprehend high-school physics). Now a proper investigation must take place as the official government account of 9-11 is a demonstrable and boldface lie.

Your argument is absurd in the extreme as that of someone who asserts that no murder took place despite of video-footage, the knife, and eyewitnesses who witnessed it, only because we do not know what toothpaste the assassin used in the morning, or what bus or car he took to get there. It is irrelevant! We have videotape of the murder. We know IT TOOK PLACE. How it was done, is IRRELEVANT to the reality and fact that IT DID TAKE PLACE. We have unimpeachable evidence that Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW precisely it was done will be answered in the investigation.

It's like saying the Sun is not shining because I don't know precisely how the Sun was made! The knowledge of how it was made is irrelevant to the FACT that it is shining!

You reasoning is a study in absurdity, distortion and lies! EVIDENCE is king. EVIDENCE. Irrefutable EVIDENCE says Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW exactly it was done is irrelevant to the fact that it WAS done!

[Truth B Knowncaptain of 100]

So the carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc., were "in on it." How could they not have been if they were installing "bombs" (the original theory)? Hmmm. . .let's see, were the remodelers under contract with the Port Authority? Presumably, they were. And the remodeling company agreed to have its workers install explosives in the buildings--is that what you're saying? How much sense does that make? Let's say then the remodeling work was put out for bid, and XYZ Company was the winning bidder. They understood, in submitting their bid, the specific nature of the work to be done, including installing explosives in the three buildings. Would they want to be involved? Obviously not.
Let's say that a foreign company was contracted to do the work (Dr. Jones' theory), and there was no open bidding process (illegal). How do you suppose the NYC trades unions would look upon that? How could that be kept secret?

Even a cursory analysis of the foregoing explanations are studies in absurdity. That's apropos, inasmuch as the entire 9/11 conspiracy theory is a study in absurdity.

The companies, and security firms involved in "renovations" at WTC must be thoroughly investigated. As was already mentioned, Bush's family members were on the boards of companies overseeing security at WTC AND at the airport from which alleged "hijackers" allegedly took off.


The point is that we have proven Controlled Demolition beyond reasonable doubt (note I say REASONABLE as in HONEST, and not paid government troll, or a person who does not comprehend high-school physics). Now a proper investigation must take place as the official government account of 9-11 is a demonstrable and boldface lie.

Your argument is absurd in the extreme as that of someone who asserts that no murder took place despite of video-footage, the knife, and eyewitnesses who witnessed it, only because we do not know what toothpaste the assassin used in the morning, or what bus or car he took to get there. It is irrelevant! We have videotape of the murder. We know IT TOOK PLACE. How it was done, is IRRELEVANT to the reality and fact that IT DID TAKE PLACE. We have unimpeachable evidence that Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW precisely it was done will be answered in the investigation.

It's like saying the Sun is not shining because I don't know precisely how the Sun was made! The knowledge of how it was made is irrelevant to the FACT that it is shining!

You reasoning is a study in absurdity, distortion and lies! EVIDENCE is king. EVIDENCE. Irrefutable EVIDENCE says Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW exactly it was done is irrelevant to the fact that it WAS done!

L.I.T., trying to get BM to see the light on this issue is like leading a horse to water... but you can't make him drink. IMHO, he is either intellectually dishonest or has the IQ of a 10 year old.

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

L.I.T., trying to get BM to see the light on this issue is like leading a horse to water... but you can't make him drink. IMHO, he is either intellectually dishonest or has the IQ of a 10 year old.

In my humble opinion, he is a paid government troll. It all adds up, according to him he is ex-military, and ex-English professor. I guess they came to him and said, "how would you like to make some extra money," etc. His IQ is fine, his integrity is not. He is a paid liar.

[Robthe Sunbeam]

L.I.T., trying to get BM to see the light on this issue is like leading a horse to water... but you can't make him drink. IMHO, he is either intellectually dishonest or has the IQ of a 10 year old.

In my humble opinion, he is a paid government troll. It all adds up, according to him he is ex-military, and ex-English professor. I guess they came to him and said, "how would you like to make some extra money," etc. His IQ is fine, his integrity is not. He is a paid liar.

He's a narcissist, and narcissists can't be wrong. It's sad.

Paid liar? I'm doubt it. Look at his posts. Would you pay him?

And who's gone over to the taler side of the argument because of him? Natasha? Nope. She was already anti-truth and, more to the point, anti-truther. She's been his cheerleader since the day he arrived, what with her lauding his research (what research?!) and, despite his trolling, lambasting us for our alleged ill treatment of this "fine LDS brother", all the while giving him carte blanche to say whatever he would about us. Good grief. To my knowledge, she has never once complimented any truther on their research, compilation videos, presentations, giving lectures to classrooms full of people, etc. (By all means, prove me wrong, nat. In the meantime, here's one more of these for ya... )

How about Durango, or Mark? Nope. They arrived at their conclusions a long while ago.

If someone has hired him, you'd think they'd have enough sense (present evidence to the contrary) to stop by and check things out every once in a while, and then fire him for gross incompetence.

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

So the carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc., were "in on it." How could they not have been if they were installing "bombs" (the original theory)? Hmmm. . .let's see, were the remodelers under contract with the Port Authority? Presumably, they were. And the remodeling company agreed to have its workers install explosives in the buildings--is that what you're saying? How much sense does that make? Let's say then the remodeling work was put out for bid, and XYZ Company was the winning bidder. They understood, in submitting their bid, the specific nature of the work to be done, including installing explosives in the three buildings. Would they want to be involved? Obviously not.
Let's say that a foreign company was contracted to do the work (Dr. Jones' theory), and there was no open bidding process (illegal). How do you suppose the NYC trades unions would look upon that? How could that be kept secret?

Even a cursory analysis of the foregoing explanations are studies in absurdity. That's apropos, inasmuch as the entire 9/11 conspiracy theory is a study in absurdity.

The companies, and security firms involved in "renovations" at WTC must be thoroughly investigated.

Yes, indeed. Just sure as shootin' they're guilty as sin based on ah, er, eh. . . .

: As was already mentioned, Bush's family members were on the boards of companies overseeing security at WTC AND at the airport from which alleged "hijackers" allegedly took off.

Here we see clear evidence of the conjectorial, guilty-until-proven-innoncent conspiratorial mind fully deployed.

: The point is that we have proven Controlled Demolition beyond reasonable doubt. . . .

You have proven no such thing. If you had done so, why would an investigation be necessary? The following is instructive:

Belivers spend most of their time in blissful ignorance. . . . Some Believers get their worldview from watching or reading the news, most get it by osmosis, by referring to what 'most people think' as a guide. . . . The reason for Believers' hate of the Questioner is based on the fact that the Questioner, simply by posing the question, succeeds in momentarily jolting the Believer out of his blissful ignorance. This momentary jolt is painful, which causes the Believer to recoil at whatever idea the Questioner had. . .created." (Source: Someone Would Have Talked)

: (note I say REASONABLE as in HONEST, and not paid government troll, or a person who does not comprehend high-school physics).

Yawn, another personal attack. Unable to argue the merits of your, ah, "conspiracy," you are reduced to attacking me personally. Rather shameful, don't you think?

: Now a proper investigation must take place as the official government account of 9-11 is a demonstrable and boldface lie.

Again, inasmuch as you have already proven your case, why not simply take all of your "compelling," "irrefutable" evidence to a DA? And be sure to tell the DA that one Truther has claimed that the members of the 9/11 Commission were "paid liars."

: Your argument is absurd in the extreme as that of someone who asserts that no murder took place despite of video-footage, the knife, and eyewitnesses who witnessed it, only because we do not know what toothpaste the assassin used in the morning, or what bus or car he took to get there. It is irrelevant! We have videotape of the murder. We know IT TOOK PLACE. How it was done, is IRRELEVANT to the reality and fact that IT DID TAKE PLACE. We have unimpeachable evidence that Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW precisely it was done will be answered in the investigation.

Are you getting dizzy from talking in circles? If you have "unimpeachable evidence that CD did indeed take place," take it to court. What you want is a fishing license.

: It's like saying the Sun is not shining because I don't know precisely how the Sun was made! The knowledge of how it was made is irrelevant to the FACT that it is shining!

Nice but lame (and laughable) try at an analogy. A dead body is not proof a crime was committed. A prosecutor must be able to show how the body stopped living.

: You reasoning is a study in absurdity, distortion and lies! EVIDENCE is king. EVIDENCE. Irrefutable EVIDENCE says Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW exactly it was done is irrelevant to the fact that it WAS done!

I worry about your blood pressure.

Your last sentence is false. In a criminal case, the prosecutor must be able to explain HOW the crime was committed. Juries aren't likely to convict based on guesswork, which is a distinguishing hallmark of the conspiracy crowd.

[Thomascaptain of 1,000]

L.I.T., trying to get BM to see the light on this issue is like leading a horse to water... but you can't make him drink. IMHO, he is either intellectually dishonest or has the IQ of a 10 year old.

In my humble opinion, he is a paid government troll. It all adds up, according to him he is ex-military, and ex-English professor. I guess they came to him and said, "how would you like to make some extra money," etc. His IQ is fine, his integrity is not. He is a paid liar.

If he is a government troll, then the government is wasting their money. The more Blue debates this subject, the more people are exposed to the truth. The truth always benefits from exposure. The less 9/11 gets talked about, the better for those who wish to hide the truth.

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

L.I.T., trying to get BM to see the light on this issue is like leading a horse to water... but you can't make him drink. IMHO, he is either intellectually dishonest or has the IQ of a 10 year old.

In my humble opinion, he is a paid government troll. It all adds up, according to him he is ex-military, and ex-English professor. I guess they came to him and said, "how would you like to make some extra money," etc. His IQ is fine, his integrity is not. He is a paid liar.

He's a narcissist, and narcissists can't be wrong. It's sad.

Under forum rules, this personal attack (one in dozens lodged against me) merits some form of punishment. Hence, I should report it. Would it do any good? Nope. (Perhaps I will anyway.)

: And who's gone over to the taler side of the argument because of him? Natasha? Nope. She was already anti-truth and, more to the point, anti-truther. She's been his cheerleader since the day he arrived, what with her lauding his research (what research?!) and, despite his trolling, lambasting us for our alleged ill treatment of this "fine LDS brother", all the while giving him carte blanche to say whatever he would about us. Good grief. To my knowledge, she has never once complimented any truther on their research, compilation videos, presentations, giving lectures to classrooms full of people, etc. (By all means, prove me wrong, nat. In the meantime, here's one more of these for ya... )

Ah yes, you have been so abused. 'Tis enough to make a grown man cry. And shame on Natasha.

: How about Durango, or Mark? Nope. They arrived at their conclusions a long while ago.

Oops, you left out Loran Blood--he who has handed the conspiracists their collective heads on a platter, and has left you blubbering.

: If someone has hired him, you'd think they'd have enough sense (present evidence to the contrary) to stop by and check things out every once in a while, and then fire him for gross incompetence.

Why, yes, you would certainly think so. I wonder why they haven't done that, grossly incompetent as I am.

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

If someone has hired him, you'd think they'd have enough sense (present evidence to the contrary) to stop by and check things out every once in a while, and then fire him for gross incompetence.

Think about this. If he was hired, it was by other people who are paid to promote lies on the internet. (We have posted references where government officials called for government infiltration of truth forums to bring in a "balance" of lies). BM5 is doing a good job under the circumstances. I mean if you were hired to be a devils advocate, could you have done much better? He has no leg to stand on, but he still grasps at every straw and puts up a barrage of verbiage that to ignorant people like Natasha seem reasonable because they can't handle the truth, nor understand high-school physics.


But the more BM5 writes, the more people get convinced of government lie, and the stronger the truth gets, because truth always gets stronger under closer examination, and lie gets weaker. That is the difference between a lie and the truth, they behave diametrically opposite under scrutiny. That's why truth ALWAYS wins! Fighting it is like fighting God, you cannot win.

So my complements to you BM5! Your opposition promoted the truth in a mighty way! If you got paid for this, these were money well spent. We needed a punching bag! And your loony theories were it. And boy, we had fun with it!

Cheers!

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

Are you getting dizzy from talking in circles? If you have "unimpeachable evidence that CD did indeed take place," take it to court. What you want is a fishing license.

Courts are largely controlled by the gadiantons. What is needed is a shift in public opinion where lie cannot hide anymore.

In a criminal case, the prosecutor must be able to explain HOW the crime was committed. Juries aren't likely to convict based on guesswork, which is a distinguishing hallmark of the conspiracy crowd.

We proved that a murder took place, or in other words, we prooved that controlled demolition with explosives took place; we have shown the motive; we have shown the possible means of execution i.e. ability, and we have shown that the official story of 9-11 is a blatant and patent lie. Now we have basis to call for an empowered investigation which will answer the exact details of how the crime was carried out.

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

If someone has hired him, you'd think they'd have enough sense (present evidence to the contrary) to stop by and check things out every once in a while, and then fire him for gross incompetence.

: Think about this. If he was hired, it was by other people who are paid to promote lies on the internet. (We have posted references where government officials called for government infiltration of truth forums to bring in a "balance" of lies). BM5 is doing a good job under the circumstances. I mean if you were hired to be a devils advocate, could you have done much better? He has no leg to stand on, but he still grasps at every straw and puts up a barrage of verbiage that to ignorant people like Natasha seem reasonable because they can't handle the truth, nor understand high-school physics.

Your insistence that I am in the employ of the government (or any other entity) demonstrates your proclivity for concocting conspiracies out of thin air. Little wonder then, is it, that you think three huge buildings were prepped for CD in total secrecy, and no one--after circa 11 years--
has come forward to provide credible, direct eyewitness testimony so stating. (I see you couldn't resist taking a cheap shot at Natasha, a circumstance that, in truth, comes as no surprise; you are who you are.)

: But the more BM5 writes, the more people get convinced of government lie, and the stronger the truth gets, because truth always gets stronger under closer examination, and lie gets weaker. That is the difference between a lie and the truth, they behave diametrically opposite under scrutiny. That's why truth ALWAYS wins! Fighting it is like fighting God, you cannot win.

Such words of stunning, breathtaking wisdom should be engraved in. . .paper-mache.

: So my complements to you BM5! Your opposition promoted the truth in a mighty way! If you got paid for this, these were money well spent. We needed a punching bag! And your loony theories were it. And boy, we had fun with it!

It's always a good idea to put on a happy face, even when you've been thoroughly thrashed.

[White Feathercaptain of 100]

Oops, you left out Loran Blood--he who has handed the conspiracists their collective heads on a platter, and has left you blubbering.

The same person who won't answer a direct question?

The conspiracy exists just the same as the devil exists and its centrally driven. Admittedly too many go down the conspiracy rabbit hole only to see conspiracy everywhere including their own church leadership. Ironically, they tend to overlook it in their chosen political leaders though. That said, the conspiracy still exists and God has warned us of it in these latter days.

9/11 for all intents and purposes is a conspiracy. We do not have an honest investigation or the truth. Thus a conspiracy exists. Only a fool would argue otherwise. To what extent its tentacles reach through the depths of government, corporations, and global government entities? Unless we are complete insiders we do not know and can only guess. There have literally been thousands of whistle blowers over the years who have provided their personal perspectives and insights. Pieced together (an art for sure) one can get (I think) a fairly decent view of the whole conspiracy albeit without being an insider its only an educated guess.

The fact is Oswald could not do what the government said he did. Somebody is lying. Why?

The fact is Bld #7 could not come down the way it did without explosives. Somebody is lying. Why?

Men of the highest personal character have testified before God and the representatives of the people of plots to overthrow the government of the United States of America. The information is available. You can start with The Business Plot and the testimony of Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler for an example of what I have testified of.

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

If he is a government troll, then the government is wasting their money. The more Blue debates this subject, the more people are exposed to the truth. The truth always benefits from exposure. The less 9/11 gets talked about, the better for those who wish to hide the truth.

Exactly my point!


But remember, all truth in this world goes through 3 stages:

first they ridicule and ignore you, (that stage is almost complete now);

then, when ignoring and ridicule does not work anymore, they strenuously oppose and fight it (that's been going on too);

and the third, the truth is accepted as self-evident.

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

Oops, you left out Loran Blood--he who has handed the conspiracists their collective heads on a platter, and has left you blubbering.

Strange, I don't remember him posting in this thread. He would've been shredded.

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

Your insistence that I am in the employ of the government (or any other entity) demonstrates your proclivity for concocting conspiracies out of thin air. Little wonder then, is it, that you think three huge buildings were prepped for CD in total secrecy, and no one--after circa 11 years--
has come forward to provide credible, direct eyewitness testimony so stating.

Both of these propositions are true. And, besides, don't you know that it is NOT necessary to have a confession of the perpetrator to convict him?

: But the more BM5 writes, the more people get convinced of government lie, and the stronger the truth gets, because truth always gets stronger under closer examination, and lie gets weaker. That is the difference between a lie and the truth, they behave diametrically opposite under scrutiny. That's why truth ALWAYS wins! Fighting it is like fighting God, you cannot win.

Such words of stunning, breathtaking wisdom should be engraved in. . .paper-mache.

Well, thank you! Please do. And put it on your desk, next to the keyboard.

: So my complements to you BM5! Your opposition promoted the truth in a mighty way! If you got paid for this, these were money well spent. We needed a punching bag! And your loony theories were it. And boy, we had fun with it!

It's always a good idea to put on a happy face, even when you've been thoroughly thrashed.

Yes, keep that in mind.

[natashacaptain of 1,000]

So the carpenters, electricians, plumbers, etc., were "in on it." How could they not have been if they were installing "bombs" (the original theory)? Hmmm. . .let's see, were the remodelers under contract with the Port Authority? Presumably, they were. And the remodeling company agreed to have its workers install explosives in the buildings--is that what you're saying? How much sense does that make? Let's say then the remodeling work was put out for bid, and XYZ Company was the winning bidder. They understood, in submitting their bid, the specific nature of the work to be done, including installing explosives in the three buildings. Would they want to be involved? Obviously not.
Let's say that a foreign company was contracted to do the work (Dr. Jones' theory), and there was no open bidding process (illegal). How do you suppose the NYC trades unions would look upon that? How could that be kept secret?

Even a cursory analysis of the foregoing explanations are studies in absurdity. That's apropos, inasmuch as the entire 9/11 conspiracy theory is a study in absurdity.

The companies, and security firms involved in "renovations" at WTC must be thoroughly investigated. As was already mentioned, Bush's family members were on the boards of companies overseeing security at WTC AND at the airport from which alleged "hijackers" allegedly took off.


The point is that we have proven Controlled Demolition beyond reasonable doubt (note I say REASONABLE as in HONEST, and not paid government troll, or a person who does not comprehend high-school physics). Now a proper investigation must take place as the official government account of 9-11 is a demonstrable and boldface lie.

Your argument is absurd in the extreme as that of someone who asserts that no murder took place despite of video-footage, the knife, and eyewitnesses who witnessed it, only because we do not know what toothpaste the assassin used in the morning, or what bus or car he took to get there. It is irrelevant! We have videotape of the murder. We know IT TOOK PLACE. How it was done, is IRRELEVANT to the reality and fact that IT DID TAKE PLACE. We have unimpeachable evidence that Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW precisely it was done will be answered in the investigation.

It's like saying the Sun is not shining because I don't know precisely how the Sun was made! The knowledge of how it was made is irrelevant to the FACT that it is shining!

You reasoning is a study in absurdity, distortion and lies! EVIDENCE is king. EVIDENCE. Irrefutable EVIDENCE says Controlled Demolition did indeed take place. HOW exactly it was done is irrelevant to the fact that it WAS done!

L.I.T., trying to get BM to see the light on this issue is like leading a horse to water... but you can't make him drink. IMHO, he is either intellectually dishonest or has the IQ of a 10 year old.

THAT was pretty unkind, Truth. I know Blue as I've told you before...and don't know anyone MORE intellectually honest....and I'd run his IQ against anyone here! All of you need to heed the counsel we got at conference....STOP IT!!!

[natashacaptain of 1,000]

L.I.T., trying to get BM to see the light on this issue is like leading a horse to water... but you can't make him drink. IMHO, he is either intellectually dishonest or has the IQ of a 10 year old.

In my humble opinion, he is a paid government troll. It all adds up, according to him he is ex-military, and ex-English professor. I guess they came to him and said, "how would you like to make some extra money," etc. His IQ is fine, his integrity is not. He is a paid liar.

THAT is not true! Once again...heed the advice at conference and just STOP IT!

[Thomascaptain of 1,000]

BlueMoon5 wrote:
Oops, you left out Loran Blood--he who has handed the conspiracists their collective heads on a platter, and has left you blubbering.

If that's true why are we all stil here, unshaken in our beleifs, while Loran Blood has left, with his tail tucked between his legs. Blood could not or would not discuss facts or issues. Mocking and insulting were his only tools. Quite ineffective.

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

Are you getting dizzy from talking in circles? If you have "unimpeachable evidence that CD did indeed take place," take it to court. What you want is a fishing license.

: Courts are largely controlled by the gadiantons.

Astonishing. Presumably you have credible evidence to support your assertion. You do? Please post it.

: What is needed is a shift in public opinion where lie cannot hide anymore.

Indeed, so post your credible evidence.

In a criminal case, the prosecutor must be able to explain HOW the crime was committed. Juries aren't likely to convict based on guesswork, which is a distinguishing hallmark of the conspiracy crowd.

: We proved that a murder took place, or in other words, we prooved that controlled demolition with explosives took place; we have shown the motive; we have shown the possible means of execution i.e. ability, and we have shown that the official story of 9-11 is a blatant and patent lie. Now we have basis to call for an empowered investigation which will answer the exact details of how the crime was carried out.

Nonsense. You haven't proved that any murders took place. . .you haven't proved that CD brought down the buildings. . .you haven't proved motive. . .you haven't proved "the possible means of execution". . .and you haven't proved that the 9/11 Commission's findings constitute a "blatant and patient lie". You can't haul someone into court on the basis of conjecture, supposition, innuendo, inference, presumption, suspicion, coincidences, hunches, opinions, and shots in the dark. You lack even the rudimentary elements of a credible case. Specifically, you don't know when the alleged crime took place. . .you don't know where they obtained exotic NT. . .you don't know how/where they stored it. . .you don't know who installed it or how many were involved. . .you don't have a credible witness to testify that he/she saw the installation process as it was happening or saw evidence of installation. . .you cannot prove motive. . .you cannot cite evidence that even three independent labs found NT in dust from ground zero. . .your so-called video "documentaries" are best described as propaganda pieces. . .the testimony of your building-collapse experts is readily challenged by experts of equal if not greater standing. You would be shredded on cross-examination ( a moot point because no court would schedule your "case" for trial).

In short, the reason you haven't attracted the attention of the applicable DA or a grand jury is that your conspiracy theory is a load of chicken droppings.

[moonwhimcaptain of 1,000]

The Toronto Hearings on 9/11



Description
Press For Truth and The International Center for 9/11 Studies present The Toronto Hearings on 9/11: Uncovering Ten Years of Deception. This over five hour DVD features comprehensive coverage of the 4 day Toronto Hearings from September 2011.

Ten years have passed since the World Trade Center attacks of September 11, 2001, and there are still many unanswered questions surrounding that fateful day.

In 2011, experts and scientists from around the world gathered in Toronto, Canada to present new and established evidence that questions the official story of 9/11. This evidence was presented to a distinguished panel of experts over a 4 day period.

Through their analysis and scientific investigations, they hope to spark a new investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Featuring expert witness testimony from: David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage, David Chandler, Kevin Ryan, Niels Harrit, Barbara Honegger, Peter Dale Scott, Graeme MacQueen, Jonathan Cole, Cynthia McKinney ...and many more!

[InfoWarrior82captain of 1,000]

Nonsense. You haven't proved that any murders took place. . .you haven't proved that CD brought down the buildings. . .you haven't proved motive. . .you haven't proved "the possible means of execution". . .and you haven't proved that the 9/11 Commission's findings constitute a "blatant and patient lie". .

I would highly suggest you start back on page 1 of this thread and re read all the evidence.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=14104

[7cylon7captain of 1,000]

if is looks like a moron, smells like a moron, acts like a moron, types like a moron, lies like a moron... then what... it is.

bluemoon5

[Truth B Knowncaptain of 100]

BM, seriously... there are 90+ pages here of incriminating and undeniable evidence and scientific proof of what really took place on 9/11 - if you can honestly say that there is no evidence, no proof of an inside job, no murder, etc., then God speed my friend.

[freedomfightercaptain of 1,000]

Is someone writing a book? Page 97 is coming up, and "still" no resolve.



7 Facts about Building 7

1) If fire caused Building 7 to collapse, it would be the first ever fire-induced collapse of a steel-frame high-rise.

2) Building 7’s collapse was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.

3) According to a Zogby poll in 2006, 43% of Americans did not know about Building 7.

4) It took the federal government seven years to conduct an investigation and issue a report for Building 7.

5) 1,500+ architects and engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation into the destruction of Building 7, specifying that it should include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives.

6) Numerous witnesses say the possibility of demolishing Building 7 was widely discussed by emergency personnel at the scene and advocated by the building’s owner.

7) Building 7 housed several intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the NYC Office of Emergency Management’s Emergency Operations Center, more commonly known as “Giuliani’s Bunker”.

In addition to the Twin Towers and Building 7, the World Trade Center complex included buildings 3, 4, 5, and 6. Compared to Building 7, all of these buildings were severely damaged, first by falling rubble from the tower collapses, then by fires that burned for hours. Although these buildings were in critical condition, none of them collapsed.

Source: http://rememberbuilding7.org/7-facts-about-building-7/

[freedomfightercaptain of 1,000]

http://911scholars.org/

http://stj911.org/

[Truth B Knowncaptain of 100]

This whole thing with Bluemoon reminds me of one of Bart Simpson's lines...

"I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything!"

[BlueMoon5captain of 1,000]

if is looks like a moron, smells like a moron, acts like a moron, types like a moron, lies like a moron... then what... it is.

bluemoon5

This is a loathsome, despicable personal attack; it says volumes more about you than about me.

It is, however, not lacking in irony, as in "If IS looks like a moron. . . ." Your're not exactly an award-winning typist yourself, are you?

[LoveIsTruthcaptain of 1,000]

Nonsense. You haven't proved that any murders took place. . .you haven't proved that CD brought down the buildings. . .you haven't proved motive. . .you haven't proved "the possible means of execution". . .and you haven't proved that the 9/11 Commission's findings constitute a "blatant and patient lie". You can't haul someone into court on the basis of conjecture, supposition, innuendo, inference, presumption, suspicion, coincidences, hunches, opinions, and shots in the dark. You lack even the rudimentary elements of a credible case. Specifically, you don't know when the alleged crime took place. . .you don't know where they obtained exotic NT. . .you don't know how/where they stored it. . .you don't know who installed it or how many were involved. . .you don't have a credible witness to testify that he/she saw the installation process as it was happening or saw evidence of installation. . .you cannot prove motive. . .you cannot cite evidence that even three independent labs found NT in dust from ground zero. . .your so-called video "documentaries" are best described as propaganda pieces. . .the testimony of your building-collapse experts is readily challenged by experts of equal if not greater standing. You would be shredded on cross-examination ( a moot point because no court would schedule your "case" for trial).

In short, the reason you haven't attracted the attention of the applicable DA or a grand jury is that your conspiracy theory is a load of chicken droppings.

Your response is tantamount to saying Na-ah, and it is a lie. This thread, from the first post on, is full of strong and often unimpeachable evidence. You have lied. I guess that makes you a liar, but we already knew that. If you have something more than na-ah, please do share. Otherwise, accept our correct characterization of what you are.


Cheers.

[durangoutcaptain of 1,000]

Is someone writing a book? Page 97 is coming up, and "still" no resolve.



7 Facts about Building 7

1) If fire caused Building 7 to collapse, it would be the first ever fire-induced collapse of a steel-frame high-rise. So what?--proves nothing.

2) Building 7’s collapse was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. So what?--proves nothing.

3) According to a Zogby poll in 2006, 43% of Americans did not know about Building 7. So what?--proves nothing.

4) It took the federal government seven years to conduct an investigation and issue a report for Building 7. So what?--proves nothing.

5) 1,500+ architects and engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation into the destruction of Building 7, specifying that it should include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives. So what?--proves nothing.

6) Numerous witnesses say the possibility of demolishing Building 7 was widely discussed by emergency personnel at the scene and advocated by the building’s owner. So what?--proves nothing.

7) Building 7 housed several intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the NYC Office of Emergency Management’s Emergency Operations Center, more commonly known as “Giuliani’s Bunker”. So what?--proves nothing.

In addition to the Twin Towers and Building 7, the World Trade Center complex included buildings 3, 4, 5, and 6. Compared to Building 7, all of these buildings were severely damaged, first by falling rubble from the tower collapses, then by fires that burned for hours. Although these buildings were in critical condition, none of them collapsed. So what?--proves nothing.

Source: http://rememberbuilding7.org/7-facts-about-building-7/

Irrefutable proof? hmmmmm.

[durangoutcaptain of 1,000]

if is looks like a moron, smells like a moron, acts like a moron, types like a moron, lies like a moron... then what... it is.

bluemoon5

This is a loathsome, despicable personal attack; it says volumes more about you than about me.

It is, however, not lacking in irony, as in "If IS looks like a moron. . . ." Your're not exactly an award-winning typist yourself, are you?

BM5 don't sweat it. The personal attacks have always originated with the Truthers and RP worshipers. I think I know why and I'm sure you do too.