911: The chain of evidence

Childlike Empress · Jun 13, 2006

Hi, i am missing the chain of evidence for the theory that the 19 alleged highjackers commited the mass murder of September 11th 2001.

Please provide all sources but one - the "9/11 Commission"-Report.

Hawk one · Jun 13, 2006

But that report does present the chain of evidence, as collected by many different agencies and independent parties (such as the airplane companies). All you have to do is to read the facts.

Shrinker · Jun 13, 2006

Presumably all the parties who contributed to the report are also forbidden sources? FBI, FEMA etc, including all witnesses and individuals involved in the investigation. Because, if the report contradicted the individual findings then those parties would have spoken up by now. That they haven't spoken up shows that they are in on it too.

So that leaves a bunch of Quicktimes off the net, and 'alternative' media sources. We've already learned that these aren't useful ways to assemble a coherent theory. The 9/11 Truth movement is proof of that.

EvilBiker · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
Hi, i am missing the chain of evidence for the theory that the 19 alleged highjackers commited the mass murder of September 11th 2001.

It's in your sock drawer, where you always leave it! How many times do I have to tell you? Sheesh.

Idiot.

MRC_Hans · Jun 13, 2006

Let's see:

Planes being hijacked, as evidenced by flight control records.
Planes flying into the buildings as evidenced by millons of withnesses, tons of stills and video footage.
The hijacked planes failing to land in other places.
No other planes missing.
The passengers and crew on the hijacked planes failing to show up in other places.
Remains of the passengers and crew on the hijacked planes being identified on the crash sites.
Records and diaries of the hijackers being left behind.
Passenger lists showing that the hijackers boarded the hijacked planes.

MMmmm, I guess it all fits.

Hans

Childlike Empress · Jun 13, 2006

MRC_Hans said:
Planes being hijacked, as evidenced by flight control records.
Planes flying into the buildings as evidenced by millons of withnesses, tons of stills and video footage.
The hijacked planes failing to land in other places.
No other planes missing.
The passengers and crew on the hijacked planes failing to show up in other places.
Remains of the passengers and crew on the hijacked planes being identified on the crash sites.
Records and diaries of the hijackers being left behind.

Irrelevant. I want a chain of evidence. That's not "there were planes" but "these people did it".

MRC_Hans said:
Passenger lists showing that the hijackers boarded the hijacked planes.

Source?

@Shrinker: The parties are allowed. With independent (from the "report") statements.

Anacoluthon64 · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
Please provide all sources but one - the "9/11 Commission"-Report.

This request, in and of itself, just begs to be regarded with deep suspicion.

What, pray, is your agenda?

'Luthon64

Shrinker · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
@Shrinker: The parties are allowed. With independent (from the "report") statements.

So, an FBI statement that didn't make it into the report is okay, but if it did appear in the report it's disallowed? Or are you saying we can use any words in the report so long as we can also find them printed elsewhere?

One more thing, remind me, how much time and money the Commision required to pull together all the evidence and publish it as a coherent whole. How long would it have taken them if they had to Google for the information, or go to a library, or file FOIA requests? And why is it that only this amount of time and effort on our part, will settle the debate?

Why don't you settle it by showing us one single deception in the official report. Wouldn't that be quicker? Surely you have hundreds of these already...

Childlike Empress · Jun 13, 2006

Shrinker said:
So, an FBI statement that didn't make it into the report is okay, but if it did appear in the report it's disallowed? Or are you saying we can use any words in the report so long as we can also find them printed elsewhere?

I think the latter is ok for me.

Shrinker said:
remind me, how much ... money the Commision required to pull together all the evidence

Sure, that would be less than $167 per murder.

Hawk one · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
Sure, that would be less than $167 per murder.

Or it would be more like 20 million dollars, which is a lot more than the 400 000 dollar lie you're suggesting.

Shrinker · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
I think the latter is ok for me.

Sure, that would be less than $167 per murder.

According to your link Al Qeada allegedly paid $166 per murder so that's a very poor answer. And next time, why don't you quote the relevant paragraph so I don't have to read the whole thing to find your badly mangled point.

You also seem to have missed a part...

Shrinker said:
Why don't you settle it by showing us one single deception in the official report. Wouldn't that be quicker? Surely you have hundreds of these already...

Childlike Empress · Jun 13, 2006

@Hawk one: What has your link to do with this thread? I am talking about the "9/11 Commission"-Report. Not the NIST-Report.

@Shrinker: I asked for evidence. Period.

Anacoluthon64 · Jun 13, 2006

Me earlier ... said:
What, pray, is your agenda?

Your silence only adds to the suspicion.

'Luthon64

Shrinker · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
@Shrinker: I asked for evidence. Period.

No you're making a childish and practically impossible challenge. It would take decades for any of us to replicate the 9/11 report using only spare time and personal resources, and you know it perfectly well. It would take minutes for you to show why the report is at fault, yet you can't do it. Why not?

fsol · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
@Shrinker: I asked for evidence. Period.

Period? No you didn't. What's wrong with the 9/11 commission report?

Hawk one · Jun 13, 2006

No, the link shows:

NIST redirected $3.4 million in fiscal year 2002 to begin a three-part plan in response to the WTC disaster. The agency received $16 million for the investigation in September from the FY 2002 supplemental appropriation. The FY 2003 appropriation includes an increase of $3 million.

Bolding mine. The other sums are additions to this main sum. Naturally, you wouldn't need as much money in 2004, because by then the bulk of the investigation is already done. That's the trick about reading comprehension. In other words, my mistake is that their total budget is a lot -more- than 20 million dollars, not less.

Besides, didn't you not want the 9/11 commision report anyway? Well, read the NIST report instead, then.

Childlike Empress · Jun 13, 2006

Hawk one said:
No, the link shows:

NIST redirected $3.4 million in fiscal year 2002 to begin a three-part plan in response to the WTC disaster. The agency received $16 million for the investigation in September from the FY 2002 supplemental appropriation. The FY 2003 appropriation includes an increase of $3 million.

And the link goes to what site? NIST. Watch Commander Kean speaking in the link i provided. Less than half a million for the Commission-Report. Compare that to one blowjob Mr. Clinton enjoyed.

Shrinker said:
No you're making a childish and practically impossible challenge. It would take decades for any of us to replicate the 9/11 report using only spare time and personal resources, and you know it perfectly well. It would take minutes for you to show why the report is at fault, yet you can't do it. Why not?

Gravy asked me if i really believe that there is no evidence for the "19 Highjackers"-CT and i said yes. Am i wrong? I thought this is a "skeptics"-Forum.

fsol · Jun 13, 2006

And the amount of money spent has what bearing on the findings exactly? I find it quite distasteful that you would then say "only" $167 per victim as if the number of victims and the amount spent on the report have any bearing on each other. What would have been an adequate amount to spend on the report "per victim?"

Hawk one · Jun 13, 2006

Childlike Empress said:
And the link goes to what site? NIST. Watch Commander Kean speaking in the link i provided. Less than half a million for the Commission-Report. Compare that to one blowjob Mr. Clinton enjoyed.

Why would I compare apples to oranges? I agree that the Clinton case was blown out of proportions, but that is an entirely separate matter.

The objectives are so wildly different, as NIST are doing the investigation, while the 9/11 commission made the end report.

Here's a tip: Any investigation will cost more to produce than a report. I'll leave it to you to figure out why this is.

Gravy asked me if i really believe that there is no evidence for the "19 Highjackers"-CT and i said yes. Am i wrong? I thought this is a "skeptics"-Forum.

Basically, all the available and real evidence are pointing at the 19 hijackers, so yes, you are 99,999% likely to be wrong.

Childlike Empress · Jun 13, 2006

@fsol: What's the "defense" budget of the US? 400 Billion $? I would say: Investigate - money doesn't count.

911: The chain of evidence

Banned

Emperor of the Internet

Graduate Poster

Spectral Challenger

Penultimate Amazing

Banned

Defollyant Iconoclast

Graduate Poster

Banned

Emperor of the Internet

Graduate Poster

Banned

Defollyant Iconoclast

Graduate Poster

Graduate Poster

Emperor of the Internet

Banned

Graduate Poster

Emperor of the Internet

Banned

Share this page

ISF - Join now!