Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Originally Posted by westozguy

It IS for the official explanation of the events to match the true evidence which clearly it does not and never did from day one.

Currently, the conspiracy theorists cannot say where the plane or people went to, [...]

Also gotta love how our resident posters of dubious sincerity keep trying to pin this "CONSPIRACY THEORISTS" epithet on the 9/11 Truth research community,

meanwhile they (posters of dubious sincerity) ostensibly "believe" the outlandish tin-foil-hat THEORY that Osama and his merry band of 19 Arab Muslim Boxcutter Wielders successfully CONSPIRED to carry out the attacks of 9/11/01,

Architects & Engineers:

Solving the Mystery of
World Trade Center Building 7

Originally Posted by Latindancer

If the loonies admit there was at least one aeroplane engine found (though there were actually two), and that a missile hit the pentagon, where did the engine come from ? And how was it put there ?

Only one jet engine was found.

Of a plane that was there.

But then disappeared, while NOT flying into the Pentagon.

Thus, the plane that was there, wasn't there, but a Jet engine was found.

While something else hit the Pentagon.

Most likely a missile that does not contain Jet engines like the one found.

???

I bet asking where said Jet engine came from will be construed as "Demanding impossible proof" by the Loonie Brigade.

Seriously, even a class of special needs children wouldn't be so dense, by this point.

"Jeezuz Kryst - it's like holding a conversation with medieval peasants..".

You self-righteous PHUCK... Who do you think you are?

Don't presume to know anything about me nor judge my level of intelligence, because judging by the ramblings of your closed mind, your presumptions would be incorrect.

Originally Posted by westozguy

"Jeezuz Kryst - it's like holding a conversation with medieval peasants..".

You self-righteous PHUCK... Who do you think you are?

Don't presume to know anything about me nor judge my level of intelligence, because judging by the ramblings of your closed mind, your presumptions would be incorrect.

Really? You mean you are *not* a medieval peasant, whisked out of the middle-ages by a time machine? Really? I apologize for the earnest error.

Allow me to correct myself, then:

"Jeezuz Kryst - it's like holding a conversation with someone with the mental capacity of medieval peasants.."

There. Much better.

I do like your quick use of Rule #2, though ("2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the "How dare you!" gambit.")

As for "who do I think I am?"

Obviously, someone smarter than you.

Case closed.

Originally Posted by westozguy

the ramblings of your closed mind

If you can give detail of how he is rambling, please do so. (He's actually quite logical).

BTW, where did the jet engine and other plane debris come from ? How was it put there ? When ?

Originally Posted by Latindancer

BTW, where did the jet engine and other plane debris come from ? How was it put there ? When ?

See, even easier - instead of having to explain where it went ("Thin air?"), now the question is even simpler - where did it come from, who put it there?

In conclusion, one of my favorite quotes from H.L. Mencken:

From “VARIETIES OF ENVY” Baltimore Evening Sun, June 1936 with a few adaptations and apologies to Immortal Henry.

“The central belief of every moron is that he is the victim of a mysterious conspiracy against his common rights and true deserts. He ascribes all his failure to get on in the world, all his congenital incapacity and damfoolishenss, to the machinations of the werewolves assembled in Wall Street or some other such den of infamy. If these villains could be put down, he holds, he would at once become rich, powerful and eminent.”

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

Just to put this stupidity of FBI complicity to rest:

1993 World Trade Center bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[...]

Ah yes, WIKIPEDIA, the SOURCE of ALL TRULY TRUE KNOWLEDGE,

September 11 attacks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
^


I'll look at wiki's page for an overview of politically neutral topics. They get top search engine billing for most keywords about which wiki has an entry.

But anything POLITICALLY LOADED, esp those subjects in which ISRAEL HAS A VITAL INTEREST IN HOW THE SUBJECT PERCEIVED BY JOE-SIX-PACK,

FUGGEDABOUDIT!!



VETERANS TODAY BANS WIKIPEDIA REFERENCES FROM SITE | Veterans Today

Lies, Damned Lies, and Wikipedia


^ Cthulhu tries to deploy Rule #8:

8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority [ZIOpedia ] and present your argument with enough "jargon" and "minutiae" to illustrate you are "one who knows", and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.

So Cthulhu, your Rule #8 gambit scores a big FAIL - and the question remains, is this true re what you still believe?

Despite this evidence ^, the 1993 bombing is still to this day attributed by Cthulhu to some flavor of Arab Muslim Semite “terrorists” with the FBI’s involvement muted if ever mentioned.

Honest readers, ask yourselves: If Cthulhu stubbornly maintains his "belief" in the "Official 1993 WTC Bombing Story", in spite of detailed, descriptive, and explicit evidence ^ debunking that story, vindicating the FBI's Egyptian patsy, and illuminating that the FBI operation itself perpetrated the bombing,

...WHAT DOES THIS OBSTINANCE IN THE FACE OF THE HARD FACTS, TELL YOU ABOUT CTHULHU's SIMILARLY STUBBORN "BELIEF" THAT 19 ARAB MUSLIMS CONCEIVED & PERPETRATED THE 9/11 ATTACKS??

full issue & question here: #313 (permalink)

Architects & Engineers:

Solving the Mystery of
World Trade Center Building 7

^ seriously nice to see you've found a home here, Prufie.

Still hanging out in Tilac on Wednesday nights, looking for those Amazonian beauties ?

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

Originally Posted by Latindancer

If the loonies admit there was at least one aeroplane engine found (though there were actually two), and that a missile hit the pentagon, where did the engine come from ? And how was it put there ?

Only one jet engine was found.

Of a plane that was there.

But then disappeared, while NOT flying into the Pentagon.

Thus, the plane that was there, wasn't there, but a Jet engine was found.

While something else hit the Pentagon.

Most likely a missile that does not contain Jet engines like the one found.


Seriously, even a class of special needs children wouldn't be so dense, by this point.

"Seriously, even a class of special needs children wouldn't be so dense, by this point"

Agreed, as below;

Cthulhu post #320- both engines were found. In fact I posted the pictures of both engines within this thread, and within the links provided (as if I needed any more proof that you do not bother reading links and looking at evidence, after you DEMAND evidence and links).

And from above; "Only one jet engine was found."

Great to see you prove youself a total moron, quack-quack.

------

Latindancer : As a mattter of fact, I studied Okinawan Karate before Bruce Lee became famous. Then continued with other styles.But as for the simple mechanics of building collapse, it really _IS_ Popular Mechanics stuff" latindancer re. WTC 911

Originally Posted by ENT

according to the fire department, very little aircraft parts were found,


After everything surrounding them had "vapourised"?

Oh...RIGHT. How is it that there are so many photos and video footage and witnesses of a largish amount of aircraft debris ??
And the engine you admit was there ? Where did it come from ? How was it put there ?

BTW, to everyone but ignorant ppl, "vapourized" also means from impact (as shown by a vid Cthulhu posted) PLUS fire.
.
.
.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

BTW, where did the jet engine and other plane debris come from ? How was it put there ? When ?

uh oh, detecting a slight shift in tact from our posters of dubious sincerity community now; altering the Rule 19 explanation accordingly,

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs . This is perhaps a variant of the "play dumb" rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon [or, "where did the jet engine and other plane debris come from ? How was it put there ? When ?" ]). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

Architects & Engineers:

Solving the Mystery of
World Trade Center Building 7

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

^ seriously nice to see you've found a home here, Prufie.

That's especially ummm, IRONIC coming from you, Cthulhu.

TeakDoor.com - The Thailand Forum - View Profile: Cthulhu
Join Date: Dec 2010
Total Posts: 454 (0.83 posts per day)
Find all posts by Cthulhu

^ here 1.5 years, historically "contributing" < 1 post/day,

REALLY ODD how suddenly you seem to have found a new purpose in life with this thread -- vigorously "arguing" in favor of the fanciful notion that Arab Muslims did 9/11, while attempting ad-hom character assassinations against anyone who disagrees...

What the heck happened ^, Cthulhu?!

Did you get a swell paying new job , or something?

Architects & Engineers:

Solving the Mystery of
World Trade Center Building 7

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Originally Posted by ENT

according to the fire department, very little aircraft parts were found,


After everything surrounding them had "vapourised"?

Oh...RIGHT. How is it that there are so many photos and video footage and witnesses of a largish amount of aircraft debris ??
And the engine you admit was there ? Where did it come from ? How was it put there ?

BTW, to everyone but ignorant ppl, "vapourized" also means from impact (as shown by a vid Cthulhu posted) PLUS fire.
.
.
.

My post said;
"i.....inside the Pentagon......according to the fire department, very little aircraft parts were found."

The engine found there could only have been either

a) placed there or,
b) flew there as part of an unidentified flying object filmed approaching the Pentagon.

You say, "BTW, to everyone but ignorant ppl, "vapourized" also means from impact (as shown by a vid Cthulhu posted) PLUS fire"

As no impact at the Pentagon as was determined by seismology, and temperatures did not reach that required to boil even aluminium, vapourisation of an aircraft did not occur within the Pentagon.

The "largish amount of aircraft debris" seen scattered around the lawn show no signs of having been in a fire or crash at the Pentagon.
.
That clean debris, oddly enough was found scattered on the lawn only to one side to the left and a considerable distance away from the fire zone, not surrounding it as might be expected and seen surrounding any other plane crash site.
-----
Latindancer : As a mattter of fact, I studied Okinawan Karate before Bruce Lee became famous. Then continued with other styles.But as for the simple mechanics of building collapse, it really _IS_ Popular Mechanics stuff" latindancer re. WTC 911

The "Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura" episode dealing with the pentagon/911 question was actually quite good.

You have to endure the tabloid/sensationalistic tone of the series- but the information, interviews etc they provide are solid. 44 mins:

Architects & Engineers:

Solving the Mystery of
World Trade Center Building 7

Originally Posted by Latindancer

BTW, where did the jet engine and other plane debris come from ? How was it put there ? When ?

People talk a lot about the WTC crashes.

But the Pennsylvania one raises lots and lots of questions.

I presume most of us on this thread have seen Loose Change, 2nd version.

Originally Posted by ENT

Cthulhu post #320- both engines were found. In fact I posted the pictures of both engines within this thread, and within the links provided (as if I needed any more proof that you do not bother reading links and looking at evidence, after you DEMAND evidence and links).

And from above; "Only one jet engine was found."

Great to see you prove youself a total moron, quack-quack.

You *do* have a big problem with the concept of *context* - I was aping, or rather, paraphrasing *you* in the section you took such offense to - albeit I'd do have to say, in that context, your conclusion about that quoted content, is very accurate in terms of describing yourself ("Great to see you prove youself a total moron").

Originally Posted by barbaro

But the Pennsylvania one raises lots and lots of questions.

Like, what?

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

Originally Posted by ENT

Cthulhu post #320- both engines were found. In fact I posted the pictures of both engines within this thread, and within the links provided (as if I needed any more proof that you do not bother reading links and looking at evidence, after you DEMAND evidence and links).

And from above; "Only one jet engine was found."

Great to see you prove youself a total moron, quack-quack.

You *do* have a big problem with the concept of *context* - I was aping, or rather, paraphrasing *you* in the section you took such offense to - albeit I'd do have to say, in that context, your conclusion about that quoted content, is very accurate in terms of describing yourself ("Great to see you prove youself a total moron").

You shoot yourself in the foot as shown above, then, in your following comment you try to prove you've got more intelligence than a worm..

Impossible quack-quack, your brains are full of duck-shit as are those of your supporters, evidenced in your attempt at witicism.

Further, the Pen and Teller vid you posted above is again just a good example of your low level of intelligence.

You're an obvious troll, so how much do you get paid to do that?


------
Latindancer : As a mattter of fact, I studied Okinawan Karate before Bruce Lee became famous. Then continued with other styles.But as for the simple mechanics of building collapse, it really _IS_ Popular Mechanics stuff" latindancer re. WTC 911

Originally Posted by ENT

The engine found there could only have been either

a) placed there or,
b) flew there as part of an unidentified flying object filmed approaching the Pentagon.
....................
That clean debris, oddly enough was found scattered on the lawn only to one side to the left and a considerable distance away from the fire zone, not surrounding it as might be expected and seen surrounding any other plane crash site.

The wrecked engine was "placed" there ? And carefully, even expertly, embedded in a wall ?

Ah....and it "flew there" as part of the UFO you say was there ? Are you still seeing them regularly in New Zealand, as you previously claimed ?

BTW, most other plane crashes are into the ground or mountains, so it's not surprising debris flies everywhere. But this one flew into a specially armoured building, so the debris was contained. Did that not occur to you ? After all, it's understandable it might not, given your complete lack of proportion and need for heavy medication from syringes as big as bicycle pumps.
.
.
.

The inside of the Pentagon, all across the 3 rings, is filled with various plane debris, including what they pulled most of the body fragments from.

ENT really is quite terrible at looking at the evidence he demands - all of that, including both engines, has been linked before -- yet, here he is, claiming "there is no proof".

Oh, and his "proof"? The old "because I say so" argument.

You shoot yourself in the foot as shown above, then, in your following comment you try to prove you've got more intelligence than a worm..

Impossible quack-quack, your brains are full of duck-shit as are those of your supporters, evidenced in your attempt at witicism.

Further, the Pen and Teller vid you posted above is again just a good example of your low level of intelligence.

You're an obvious troll, so how much do you get paid to do that?

I don't assume you're able to support and substantiate any of what you just insinuated and claimed, can you?

Yeah, I didn't think so. More of the old "because I said so" argument.

Let's show some evidence, shall we? From Rense.com - a source that ENT himself often claims:

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7li...videncesummary

Pentagon Witnesses breakdown:

136 people saw the plane approach the Pentagon, and
104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.

26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.

2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.

7 said it was a Boeing 757.

8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.

2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.

4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.

10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).

16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.

42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts.

2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.

15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.

3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.

3 took photographs of the aftermath.

Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."

And of course,

0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.

0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away.

The remains of every flight 77 victim but one (a two-year-old) was recovered and positively identified by forensics experts.

Personal effects of many survived the crash and fires and were returned to the victims' families.

^^^Tell me about the engine embedded in a wall, sounds interesting. Got anything to back your statement? A link?

As your understanding of what constitutes an unidentifiable flying object is limited to your readings of science fiction, no wonder you're so naive.

Yes, the engine likely flew there inless it was placed there, which I doubt.

Planes crash all over the place and many into buildings, such as at the WTC, apparently.
The trouble is, no plane crashed into the Pentagon.

The Pentagon was undergoing renovations at the time, and no airliner or anything much larger than the width of a doorway flew into there.

As proven by seismographic records, there was no plane crash.

____

Latindancer : As a mattter of fact, I studied Okinawan Karate before Bruce Lee became famous. Then continued with other styles.But as for the simple mechanics of building collapse, it really _IS_ Popular Mechanics stuff" latindancer re. WTC 911

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

Let's show some evidence, shall we? From Rense.com - a source that ENT himself often claims:

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7li...videncesummary

Oh, the irony !

Though probably lost on ENT