Would you support an independent 9/11 investigation?

[Bell]

Basically he did not address the central problem, i dont give a **** to his opinion whether they could or could not do it, I even give a **** to Sagadevan´s opinion on this issue. As a matter of fact I dont give a considerable **** to this skill discussion. It could have happened anyway or the other. What is most entertaining is the way the buildings were demolished er... i mean, the way they came down.


What is so 'most entertaining' about two buildings collapsing, in the process killing hundreds of people? Is 9/11 nothing more than a joke to you? Are you posting your conspiracy BS only for your own entertainment, all at the expence of the victims?

[twinstead]

Err... could they never be wrong? What about that qualified engineer from the team built the WTC saying it was nonsense that the building could be taken down that way? Has it been thoroughly debunked? Where?

I'll need a link and a name for that one, you know better than that.

ETA, perhaps you could contact theses experts and mention that they are wrong. You don't want to play a war of attrition of qualified experts, because the official story has the vast majority of them, and always will.

[omegablue]

So what actions should be taken to counter the threat of international terrorism?

None! This can´t be countered. Perhaps being a pain in the Islamic world´s butt wont make any national law solutions to be any effective on fighting terrorism from them. Face it bro, they need terrorism for running their lobbies. They need enemies, they need a freaked out population like the american population was forced to be, as a few days before the elections when it was becoming clear that Kerry would win, OBL, suspected Bush´s saudi oil pardner, appear on TV and say something like: "no matter who win, there would be terrorism..." ¬¬ Are you buying this?

[stateofgrace]

None! This can´t be countered. Perhaps being a pain in the Islamic world´s butt wont make any national law solutions to be any effective on fighting terrorism from them. Face it bro, they need terrorism for running their lobbies. They need enemies, they need a freaked out population like the american population was forced to be, as a few days before the elections when it was becoming clear that Kerry would win, OBL, suspected Bush´s saudi oil pardner, appear on TV and say something like: "no matter who win, there would be terrorism..." ¬¬ Are you buying this?

So it should all be ignored and not taken seriously, kind of like before 911?

[twinstead]

None! This can´t be countered. Perhaps being a pain in the Islamic world´s butt wont make any national law solutions to be any effective on fighting terrorism from them. Face it bro, they need terrorism for running their lobbies. They need enemies, they need a freaked out population like the american population was forced to be, as a few days before the elections when it was becoming clear that Kerry would win, OBL, suspected Bush´s saudi oil pardner, appear on TV and say something like: "no matter who win, there would be terrorism..." ¬¬ Are you buying this?

So, you contend that there is NO threat, it is just manufactured to give Americans an 'enemy'?

If true, this seems pretty convenient for your position.

I suppose you think OBL is CIA, Right?

[omegablue]

the core issues with the official story, IOW how the buildings fell down, has been answered to not only the satisfaction of this layman, but to the satisfaction of the vast majority of experts in relevant fields on Earth, for God's sake.

Ah yeah? Be kind, show me at least some!! No , not the official report link again!

You want a new investigation. If your evidence is so compelling why are you wasting your time on a relatively obscure internet forum? There's got to be some reporter somewhere in the world who wants a Nobel prize.

Ah now I see where you are going. It´s the old Randi Forum ********. If you have something paranormal, apply for the million. Oh nooooooooooooo, not that one.

'cause a Nobel prize awaits the reporter who breaks this story of the century. I say your movement has nothing. If my government was involved in the murder of 3000 innocents, and you have compelling evidence that a new investigation needs to happen, then GET IT DONE.

There are a dozend books, professionals and every kind of human being speaking openly on media , and releasing books about all the phony stuff going on. But surprisingly, no charged person or institution (charged by the ct nuts) do nothing in order to prove them wrong and why not jailing them. Yeah jail them for good. They are liars and dangerously misleading. Their accusations are way serious. Why dont they do something? Now, the interesting thing would be their defensive piece. Why did nobody messed seriously with Greg Palast for example as to ultimately proving he is wrong and applying law to him for his lies and accusations?

[omegablue]

What is so 'most entertaining' about two buildings collapsing, in the process killing hundreds of people? Is 9/11 nothing more than a joke to you? Are you posting your conspiracy BS only for your own entertainment, all at the expence of the victims?

You are ASSmuing that I dont give a bleep for the dead? Plain B.S. I´m analyzing just the interesting parts regarding the conspiracy vs official story problem. Let´s not invoke the dead on a sensationalist attempt.

[Bell]

You are ASSmuing that I dont give a bleep for the dead? Plain B.S. I´m analyzing just the interesting parts regarding the conspiracy vs official story problem. Let´s not invoke the dead on a sensationalist attempt.

I'm not ASSmuing [sic] this, I'm ASKING you. I also asked what is so entertaining about the collapse of the WTC?

[omegablue]

I'll need a link and a name for that one, you know better than that.

ETA, perhaps you could contact theses experts and mention that they are wrong. You don't want to play a war of attrition of qualified experts, because the official story has the vast majority of them, and always will.


Frank A. de Martini
Manager, WTC Construction & Project Management

Remember what he said? From that conspiracy film 911 mysteries, you could see the interview. I´m assuming you know him and the film, as you are wooo well informed about the "stupid ct stuff" going on.

[twinstead]

You are ASSmuing that I dont give a bleep for the dead? Plain B.S. I´m analyzing just the interesting parts regarding the conspiracy vs official story problem. Let´s not invoke the dead on a sensationalist attempt.

No, you're arguing from anomaly, arguing from incredulity. You have no theory of your own, can't come up with any competing narrative to the official story. All you can to is try to find ANY anomaly, real or imagined, and throw as much crap against the wall as possible hoping some of it might stick.

You're pulling the old "well, give me a list of the experts who agree with the official story" knowing full well that the list of contributers to the NIST report is a veritable who's who of eminent experts in relevant fields.

But wait, you accuse every single one of them of lying. Or of being an idiot. Of being 'in on it', because how can ANY expert believe the official story, it being so obviously wrong and all that.

Frankly, if you believe the official story is false, and the government has managed to fool or bribe all the contributing experts, then PROVE it.

[gumboot]

Basically he did not address the central problem, i dont give a **** to his opinion whether they could or could not do it, I even give a **** to Sagadevan´s opinion on this issue. As a matter of fact I dont give a considerable **** to this skill discussion. It could have happened anyway or the other. What is most entertaining is the way the buildings were demolished er... i mean, the way they came down.



You claimed he got facts wrong. Yet you cannot identify any. Care to retract that claim?

You consider the collapse of the WTC towers to be "entertaining"? I consider it to be horrific, personally.

-Gumboot

[twinstead]

Frank A. de Martini
Manager, WTC Construction & Project Management

Remember what he said? From that conspiracy film 911 mysteries, you could see the interview. I´m assuming you know him and the film, as you are wooo well informed about the "stupid ct stuff" going on.

Was Frank DeMartini involved in the design of the towers?

[omegablue]

So it should all be ignored and not taken seriously, kind of like before 911?

Course not, but how about thinking about the real causes of terrorism and not signing crappy law projects in order to make it better for the population to cope with the Government interests about war, arms and oil?

[gumboot]

There are a dozend books, professionals and every kind of human being speaking openly on media , and releasing books about all the phony stuff going on.


I wouldn't say "every kind of human being". Conspiracy Theorists are all one kind of human being.




But surprisingly, no charged person or institution (charged by the ct nuts) do nothing in order to prove them wrong and why not jailing them. Yeah jail them for good.

That's because the charged people and institutions, unlike Conspiracy Theorists, value freedom of expression.





They are liars and dangerously misleading. Their accusations are way serious. Why dont they do something?

Because nothing needs to be done. Sensible people ignore them.

-Gumboot

[Miss Anthrope]

This thread needs to move away from the rule 12 violations. If it becomes necessary to split out the incivility, I will be issuing infractions.

[stateofgrace]

Course not, but how about thinking about the real causes of terrorism and not signing crappy law projects in order to make it better for the population to cope with the Government interests about war, arms and oil?

So since you now agree that this threat is real what actions should be taken to address international terrorism ?

As asked in my original post.

Please remember you said


None


No action.

[omegablue]

Was Frank DeMartini involved in the design of the towers?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/141104designedtotake.htm

[gumboot]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/141104designedtotake.htm


Have you got a link that isn't to prisonplanet? It's not that I don't trust you, it's just that Alex Jones is a pathological liar.

-Gumboot

[damien pastaume]

This was your original claim:

"They didn't prevent it, they delayed implementing it."

As the quotes from Senator Cleland clearly demonstrate, this is not the case. They did not want an investigation at all.

And that's exactly what we've been discussing, yes? Reasons for such stonewalling? The CYA motive still makes vastly more sense than the "we cannot have a commission because it would uncover our secret plans to destroy the WTC and kill thousands of our own citizens" motive since the latter lacks anything even remotely conclusive in the way of evidence.

I'm claiming neither of these positions. The public and especially the victims' families have every right to know the truth. The administration has no right to stand in the way of an investigation into the mass murder of thousands of citizens. None whatsoever. It is absolutely unacceptable.

And you think stonewalling and interference unusual in Washington politics? Did you miss earlier this week the political theatre and grandstanding involved in the GAO's report on the question of security at the U.S.-Canadian border presented to a Congressional committee? It was pure politics from start to finish, and had little to do with actual security.

You cannot compare the investigation of 9/11 with 'politics as usual'.

[LashL]

Was Frank DeMartini involved in the design of the towers?

No, he was not.

<link to prisonplanet video>

That is not an answer to the question asked.

[pomeroo]

Ahhh so it was a jihadist attack? Do you think it was or you are telling me it was? Ah I know I know, it says were jihadist on the official report! :)


Yes, it was an attacks by jihadists. They were identified conclusively and, not insignificantly, they seem to take great pride in their victory. They talk about it a lot.

[pomeroo]

Has all this crap any use? Isnt better actually specify which part do you think the italian wierd guy was right? And what YOU qualifications to make any judgement on this? Is this plain appealing to authority? I cant see any point on this apparent useless post.


I would not dream of mocking someone whose first language is not English for faulty grammar, poor spelling, or bad syntax.
When you continually refer to an experienced pilot and flight instructor as the "Italian wierd [sic] guy," you display stupidity, not merely crude language skills.

It is not weird to refute the nonsensical falsehoods peddled by the fantasy movement. I asked you to show me where Bernacchia goes wrong and you have nothing to say.

I'll be specific: I think Bernacchia is always right, and Sagadevan is a phony.

Do you plan to continue your substance-free dance? It seems to be the style around here lately.

[pomeroo]

None! This can´t be countered. Perhaps being a pain in the Islamic world´s butt wont make any national law solutions to be any effective on fighting terrorism from them. Face it bro, they need terrorism for running their lobbies. They need enemies, they need a freaked out population like the american population was forced to be, as a few days before the elections when it was becoming clear that Kerry would win, OBL, suspected Bush´s saudi oil pardner, appear on TV and say something like: "no matter who win, there would be terrorism..." ¬¬ Are you buying this?


If it was becoming clear a few days before the eletion that Kerry would win, why was Bush leading in the polls? You are quite the know-nothing, aren't you?

[pomeroo]

This was your original claim:

"They didn't prevent it, they delayed implementing it."

As the quotes from Senator Cleland clearly demonstrate, this is not the case. They did not want an investigation at all.



I'm claiming neither of these positions. The public and especially the victims' families have every right to know the truth. The administration has no right to stand in the way of an investigation into the mass murder of thousands of citizens. None whatsoever. It is absolutely unacceptable.



You cannot compare the investigation of 9/11 with 'politics as usual'.


Are you still maintaining the fiction that no investigations of the attacks were undertaken for over a year?

As you've noticed, you can run, but you can't hide.

[omegablue]

No, he was not.


Oh no? So it is a lie from Jones?

[PhantomWolf]

None! This can´t be countered. Perhaps being a pain in the Islamic world´s butt wont make any national law solutions to be any effective on fighting terrorism from them. Face it bro, they need terrorism for running their lobbies. They need enemies, they need a freaked out population like the american population was forced to be, as a few days before the elections when it was becoming clear that Kerry would win, OBL, suspected Bush´s saudi oil pardner, appear on TV and say something like: "no matter who win, there would be terrorism..." ¬¬ Are you buying this?

Actually I disagree, it can be fought, but the way of doing it would make most people's hair curl and would not be politically correct. We can stop it by treatingit the same way that it is treated in the ME world. Govts there stamp it out because it is a threat to them. In the west we don't, we allow it to gropw beacuse we don't want to violate people's right. Well guess what. Most of the major players on 9/11 were educated and came to radial Islam in Western Countries, countries that allowed them to harbour the hate for Israel and the West and preach it to others. In their own countries they would have been squelched, but here they can do and say what they want, and that allows the to breed. The only way to stop them is to destroy that breeding ground, but then all that does it create the dictotorial sort of government they would impose themselves, so they win that way too.

[Corsair 115]

The public and especially the victims' families have every right to know the truth. And they've got several lengthy and detailed reports examining what happened.

The administration has no right to stand in the way of an investigation into the mass murder of thousands of citizens. None whatsoever. It is absolutely unacceptable. And they eventually realized it was a poor choice to delay things. They paid a political price for their miscalculation.

You cannot compare the investigation of 9/11 with 'politics as usual'.Have you seen the ridiculously partisan atmosphere in Washington the last ten or fifteen years? You may not like that the Bush administation dragged its feet over a 9/11 commission, but it did.

In any event, such foot dragging is of no consequence anyway since a commission was convened and a report issued. Technical reports were also issued by the relevant agencies.

[Jonnyclueless]

Wow, now the government report simply became “the scientific explanations presented by the scientists and backed up with the needed mathematics and scientific testing.” rule 12 WOOOW the general scientific community agreed. Is this Mr. General Scientific Community a nice person? Does he play golf? Where are the proofs? Cut the crap, you chose to agree with the government version, your plain lame choice.

Could you please provide a link to the government report you are referring to? One might begin to think you are just making up vague descriptions such as "government report" to downplay the many scientific papers and research done on all the various aspects and done by 100s of independent organizations. So please provide a link to "Government report". Show us this "government report" we are so lame to agree with.


Where are the papers about the possibility of the buildings going down that strange way? Show me everything, the physics behind it. Was it reviewed by who? Let´s check on the reviewer´s backgrounds? Put it up.

You are telling us you have done research and searched the forum and have not found the papers done on this? And what exactly was so "strange" about the effects of gravity? For starters go look at www.nist.org where you can find a 10,000 page report dedicated to the collapse of the buildings. And you can also find Dr greenings peer reviewed paper on this forum which shows the mathematics behind it.

Please show us your engineering research that shows the collapse was "strange". The HIST report was done by over 225 engineers and scientists. Since you seem to be unable to find even the most BASIC of research, here's a link to get you started :

http://www.911myths.com/html/other_contributions.html




You are ASSuming that we don’t have. Again, scientific information? Helloo? Show me the conspiracy arguments debunked one by one! Show me at least one that is an important and relevant one, come on , put it up, rule 12 . We will take a look.

There's no assuming here kid. You don't have ANY scientific information. No one is going to show you every conspiracy theory debunked one by one. If you have one you feel is legit, then present it to us and see how it stands. And while you are at it, show us a single engineer who has written a single peer reviewed paper that shows fault in the NIST findings or proves these scientific findings wrong.

rule 12

HAHAHAHAHAHAH this is a scientific forum?!?!?! How is that? Everything that is discussed here, is discussed in a scientific way? Now YOU LOSE ALL CREDIBILITY I would still give to you. Sincerely Randi forums,,scientific? What a freakin laugh my friend, rule 12

Yes it most certainly is. I don't want any credibility from you because you have no credibility yourself. I would tell you what you are but it would violate the terms of the forum.

You pretty much summed yourself up. You present these theories which have no credible basis what so ever and consider it facts. All the while denouncing the scientific community as laughable. Yet you provide not a single scientific argument or anything to back up a single claim of yours. Yes all the engineers and scientists on this forum some of which have written papers addressing these issues which have been peer reviewed are obviously nothing compared to your sheer genious.


Ahh so I got it. According from your above nonsense, after a topic is discussed here, on the SCIENTIFIC FORUMS ( ROFL!!!!!!!!!), the truth was found!!!! OOHHhhh now I see. I told you that I would not read all that threads, and what I see there and challenge you to prove me wrong, was just OPINIONS, many of them disguised as facts. But nevermind, perhaps you´re too blind to see that.

*yawn* Are we supposed to be impressed or something? Still not able to back up any of your claims eh? Most impressive.



http://www.venusproject.com/ethics_in_action/911_Impossible_Flying_757.html

Incidentally a funny Italian pilot who you might know, because you proclaim yourself as a well informed person about these “facts”, did answered to that arguments, picking on every sentence and making it appear that every statement of his is nonsense. My position is that the funny Italian did not debunk the first link info just on this personal little ego-war like he thinks “he´s the one when speaking of flying”. Come on, give me a break. Opinion vs opinion. Pick your side and make sure to say it is your opinion! Facts that debunk that arguments? Where? Put it up, rule12

Oh gee, I never saw anyone present the 'too incomitent to fly a plane' cliche before. Clearly you most certainly HAve seached the forums already. Hey everyone. Did you read that, the pilots couldn't fly. Guess we never heard that argument before. Too bad the author is simply misinformed and clearly does not know the facts. To simply say that the hijackers couldn't fly cessnas? Wow, a real winner there. I guess he forgot about them getting commercial pilots lisc. OOPS! You're going to have to do better than some idiot who claims 4 pilots couldn't fly a Cessna. It's no wonder you are so misinformed about 9/11. You use blogs as your info. Here's some info for you kid:

http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html






Err.. do you prefer no knives at all? Barehands? Begging “please let me take over”? No hijackers at all?!?!?!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

The funny thing is how readily the government gave a list on the involved! Remember U.S. did not accuse OBL officially by the time. But they promptly accused these guys. Has it been debunked ? Where? Put up or shut up.

Are you mentally OK? plasitc knives, bare hands? You do realize that passengers called in and told of them using knives, mace, and threats of bombs do you not? After all you are a researcher so you claim.

Oh wait, you blew the lid off!!! You posted an article about the hijackers being alive. OMG!!! I have never seen this before!!!! You just forgot one thing. The follow up articles where the BBC makes a correction to that article and confirming that the hijackers were indeed dead. Even the familly members admitted to it. Tell you what. You show us a single article from a legit news source claiming hijackers are still alive that is a date later than september 2001. Oh wait. Did you forget to check the date on the article? OOPS!!

Looks like you have a lot of OOPs's in your research kid. has it been debunked? It was debunked a month after it was published. Good research work there kid.


Oh I do?? Paste it! Or you are speaking through your rear end?
rule 12


I'm sorry, I don't speak 3rd grader. Please rephrase the question.


Yes? Were you there to speak with this certainty? Or are you linking me to the Official Report now?

Ah there you go with "official report". Please define official report along with "government report".



HO HO HO HO HO Do you believe in Santa Clauss also? Can you PROVE they slitted people´s throats? (now it is becoming exciting).

Yes there are recordings of the phone calls made by passengers and crew.




U-hu, they find the pepper spray on the plane debris, and were able to analyze the digitals on it huh? And then they realized that indeed was the hijacker´s possession.

No genius, the passengers reported it.


As far as the conspiracy is concerned, that´s not important, the buildings do not need to be hit by the planes at special locations, anywhere would be fine, they ´re going down anyway, like we could see with building 7. There was a staggering <insert the building number here> billion dollars insurance to be paid, contracted days before the acts. the beneficiary is a guy who owned a night club that was linked to many crimes. Again, I refer myself as a researcher? Where did I say that? rule 12

LOL! You do realize that the insurance was a loss for Larry do you not? The guy lost money in the process. Wow, let's concoct the biggest diabolical caper known to man to lose money in an insurance scam. And one that apparently is completely obvious yet the insurance companies who end up having to pay for much of it just happen to be too stupid to catch on to.


So the recipe for being smart as you is:

-Take Randi´s forum as scientific;

-Accept the Government Version, because “the scientific community corroborates such report.

U-hu, but no, thanks.


Once again, please link me to "government version". I would like to see this "government version" you keep speaking of. I am sure everyone here would love to see this "government version". Please oh please entertain us with that one!



LOOOOL, so now you have gone too far. The Hollywood thing I said was to the scientific community?!?!?! Or, in other words, by saying this here on Randi´s Show Forums, I´m saying that to the scientific community?? rule 12

Yes you are. Because it's their work you are attacking. It's their research and studies and testing and mathematics that you are saying is flawed and impossible and outright stupid. So yes you are most indeed.


So if it has been brought, it follows that it has been debunked yeah? You are sooo, sooo… <wait , I do not want to be banned>. Get a life.

Once again forgive me as I have long forgotten what it's like to think in 3rd grade speak. Perhaps once you reach a minimal maturity level I could understand you. Get a life? Wow, most impressive there kid. I guess you sure showed me.... *yawn*

Off you go now.

[omegablue]

Actually I disagree, it can be fought, but the way of doing it would make most people's hair curl and would not be politically correct. We can stop it by treatingit the same way that it is treated in the ME world. Govts there stamp it out because it is a threat to them. In the west we don't, we allow it to gropw beacuse we don't want to violate people's right. Well guess what. Most of the major players on 9/11 were educated and came to radial Islam in Western Countries, countries that allowed them to harbour the hate for Israel and the West and preach it to others. In their own countries they would have been squelched, but here they can do and say what they want, and that allows the to breed. The only way to stop them is to destroy that breeding ground, but then all that does it create the dictotorial sort of government they would impose themselves, so they win that way too.

All there is is a struggle for domination. A country which does not want to be hammered by terrorism, can´t be the most powerful in the planet, can´t be the most greed and most aggressive in terms of waging phony wars for rolling their lobbies. For example , my country is pure crap, corrupt and phony till the end, but, they are not applying for dominating the world, be it economically and or militarily. It follows then, that my country do not suffer from terrorist attacks like the one in 9/11 Does U.S. gonna give up on being the most powerful country in the world just for not being threatened by international terrorism? No.

The example you did put, of course can´t be applied despite not being impossible. I bet there is no way U.S. could effectively prevent any terrorist attacks. Let alone if there is the possibility of conspiracy, that is, the government and intel agencies (perhaps alleged secret societies) corroborating or setting up the terrorism in order to make their lobbie$ going on smoothly.

Anyways it is sadly impossible to effectively eliminating terrorism threats, despite some minor, little preventions could be made. It is more about making the population think they are safe than really making them safe.

[omegablue]

So since you now agree that this threat is real what actions should be taken to address international terrorism ?

I could not say this is not a real threat, even if the Bushes , CIA, skull and bones, are involved, it is a real threat!

Unfortunately, imo, no actions that would not cut the evil by its roots, would work. It would be either ingenuity or bogus stuff. By bogus stuff , i mean, for example, the government approving law projects and acts, that would make the population feel safer and guarded, when the results, are arguably the opposite.

What I mean by the roots of this "evil"? As I said above: Being the most powerful both economically and military country in the world, plus, waging nonsensical wars which does nothing good to anyone other than who is benefiting greatly from Arms and Oil industries, for example.

As asked in my original post.

No action.

:(

[Jonnyclueless]

Blue, you're gonna have to do better than rhetoric.

[omegablue]

Blue, you're gonna have to do better than rhetoric.

Like what? Tell me.

You look like you´re not up for any conversation but just for the old and boring rhetoric war, that is always present here on the forums. Eventually, when someone is challenging the views of the vast majority here (and yes, you tend to think all alike), some troll shows up and try to put an end to the discussion by appealing to plain rhetoric bulldropin, and by intimidating and taunting the person who is challenging the views. So all you have to do is to report the incivility, and act as if you won over the person. That is freaking pathetic. You are the typical mindless person who does accept everything that come to you from your dear sources like the official report, NIST, and FEMA! Wow, congratulations, you are a true free thinker!

Pitty I also cannot tell you what you really are, as you could see by the deletion of my previous post.

If I was playing your game I would tell you that you better do something else than plain attacking and rhetoric crap, and show why were you led to believe the official accounts, which are corroborated by the pro official account sites you cited. To me that remains a mistery. Let the toilet vase be open, for an answer is coming from JonnyHop.... oops, JonnyClueless. I´m starting to agree with your nickname, for reasonable purposes.

[Jonnyclueless]

Like what? Tell me.

You look like you´re not up for any conversation but just for the old and boring rhetoric war, that is always present here on the forums. Eventually, when someone is challenging the views of the vast majority here (and yes, you tend to think all alike), some troll shows up and try to put an end to the discussion by appealing to plain rhetoric bulldropin, and by intimidating and taunting the person who is challenging the views. So all you have to do is to report the incivility, and act as if you won over the person. That is freaking pathetic. You are the typical mindless person who does accept everything that come to you from your dear sources like the official report, NIST, and FEMA! Wow, congratulations, you are a true free thinker!

Pitty I also cannot tell you what you really are, as you could see by the deletion of my previous post.

If I was playing your game I would tell you that you better do something else than plain attacking and rhetoric crap, and show why were you led to believe the official accounts, which are corroborated by the pro official account sites you cited. To me that remains a mistery. Let the toilet vase be open, for an answer is coming from JonnyHop.... oops, JonnyClueless. I´m starting to agree with your nickname, for reasonable purposes.

The only one here not up for converstion is you. Hence the need to go into vague rhetoric such as talking about unjust wars and needless rules and making people feel safe but making them less safe, etc etc. It's all empty rhetoric to compensate for your lack of ability to bring up real points.

You aren't challenging anything. You have yet to offer anything of substance to the conversation but simple disagreement for the sake of disagreement. And then you do it by using the oldest cliches in the book, while saying people who don't use those cliches think alike.

yes youa re right, my fault is needing hard scientific evidence and data to make proper decisions instead of speculation and conjecture. Wow, you got me there. Clearly I am closed minded in my inabaility to simply make **** up such as yourself.

Yes too bad you cannot resort to acting like a 3 year old who lost his toy and spouts childish insults to compensate for a lack of debating ability. It's a tragic loss for all of us indeed.

And another lemming talking about "the offical story, the official site" etc etc. Please proide links to these for us. If you do, you'll be the first one (to provide the links, not the first to use such vague rhetoric). And oh look, a cheap shot at my username. Gosh, no one has ever tried that before. Wow, clearly you are the genius your mom told you you are. Gosh, I just could not have foreseen that. But the sad part is that the joke is on you with that one, as the whole point o the screen name is to weed out those not smart enough to offer a conversation of substance. Ooops!

[omegablue]

The only one here not up for converstion is you. Hence the need to go into vague rhetoric such as talking about unjust wars and needless rules and making people feel safe but making them less safe, etc etc. It's all empty rhetoric to compensate for your lack of ability to bring up real points.

Again, rhetoric crap. Accusations and intimidation attempts. No pal, i´m not buying this one. Cite just one point in which you think I´m wrong and I´ll take a look. Otherwise, again..you cannot say you debunked something just because you are telling me that you did. Go on, where is the argumentation? Where did I get wrong? Quit being just a nay-sayer.

You aren't challenging anything. You have yet to offer anything of substance to the conversation but simple disagreement for the sake of disagreement. And then you do it by using the oldest cliches in the book, while saying people who don't use those cliches think alike.

Lol, nice advocating on your cause. Everyone contrary to any conspiracy theory about 9/11 do not use the cliches. The CT´ers , just use a lot of it. They are not the smart ones! Ok, you demonstrated that. congratulations! Now i´m convinced by your overwhelming argumentation and debunking power!

yes youa re right, my fault is needing hard scientific evidence and data to make proper decisions instead of speculation and conjecture. Wow, you got me there. Clearly I am closed minded in my inabaility to simply make **** up such as yourself.

You are the one convinced by the official report! You are sure they are right and everyone else is wrong.

Yes too bad you cannot resort to acting like a 3 year old who lost his toy and spouts childish insults to compensate for a lack of debating ability. It's a tragic loss for all of us indeed.

I guess it is, for you love dragging people into idiotic discussions! And here you are arguing with the 3 year old kid!


And another lemming talking about "the offical story, the official site" etc etc. Please proide links to these for us. If you do, you'll be the first one (to provide the links, not the first to use such vague rhetoric). And oh look, a cheap shot at my username. Gosh, no one has ever tried that before. Wow, clearly you are the genius your mom told you you are. Gosh, I just could not have foreseen that. But the sad part is that the joke is on you with that one, as the whole point o the screen name is to weed out those not smart enough to offer a conversation of substance. Ooops!

Are you serious? Edited for Rule 12
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/pdf/fullreport.pdf

What will you bitch about now? You are truly a surprise in every post. Let´s see what comes next!

[PhantomWolf]

All there is is a struggle for domination. A country which does not want to be hammered by terrorism, can´t be the most powerful in the planet, can´t be the most greed and most aggressive in terms of waging phony wars for rolling their lobbies. For example , my country is pure crap, corrupt and phony till the end, but, they are not applying for dominating the world, be it economically and or militarily. It follows then, that my country do not suffer from terrorist attacks like the one in 9/11 Does U.S. gonna give up on being the most powerful country in the world just for not being threatened by international terrorism? No.

Are Eygpt, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Morocoo, Turkey, Spain, Lebanon, or Jordan examples of "pure crap, corrupt and phony till the end, applying for dominating the world, be it economically and or militarily"? If not, why do they have terrorism problems?

Anyways it is sadly impossible to effectively eliminating terrorism threats, despite some minor, little preventions could be made. It is more about making the population think they are safe than really making them safe.

Most people living in a free society wouldn't consider such preventions to be minor. The only way to restrict and stop terrorism is to deny the very freedoms that free countries hold as basic human rights.

[omegablue]

Are Eygpt, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Morocoo, Turkey, Spain, Lebanon, or Jordan examples of "pure crap, corrupt and phony till the end, applying for dominating the world, be it economically and or militarily"? If not, why do they have fterrorism problems?

Nice attempt. But these are 2 different realities. The fallacy is when you infer that by saying U.S suffers from terrorist threats, I mean that every country that sufers from terrorist threats do for the same reason as U.S.

There is the reason U.S. is threatened, which imo was that I said above. And there are reasons (other) why other eastern or european countries suffer from terrorism. Each own having to follow different paths and approaches to deal with their respective threats.


Most people living in a free society wouldn't consider such preventions to be minor. The only way to restrict and stop terrorism is to deny the very freedoms that free countries hold as basic human rights.

Such as?

[PhantomWolf]

Nice attempt. But these are 2 different realities. The fallacy is when you infer that by saying U.S suffers from terrorist threats, I mean that every country that sufers from terrorist threats do for the same reason as U.S.

There is the reason U.S. is threatened, which imo was that I said above. And there are reasons (other) why other eastern or european countries suffer from terrorism. Each own having to follow different paths and approaches to deal with their respective threats.

However, you also have to remember that the US was threatened long before it started retaliating. The US has been suffering terrorism against it's people for decades, back into the 60's and 70's. Mostly because of it's support for Israel.


Such as?

Freedom of speech, religion, movement, privacy, media, political opinion, liberty, justice......

[Corsair 115]

You are the typical mindless person who does accept everything that come to you from your dear sources like the official report, NIST, and FEMA!And how about official reports from NOAA or NASA or NTSB or CDC? Are those automatically untrustworthy because they are also government agencies? Or is the validity of a given report dependent on the level of evidence presented in said report?

[omegablue]

And how about official reports from NOAA or NASA or NTSB or CDC? Are those automatically untrustworthy because they are also government agencies? Or is the validity of a given report dependent on the level of evidence presented in said report?

Both have to be taken into account. Incidentally no separate government organ did disagree with the mainstream version of the facts. If we are to be suspicious about a possible government cover up, why would we not question the official reports of the government, especially with all this total agreement among different organs of it?

[omegablue]

However, you also have to remember that the US was threatened long before it started retaliating. The US has been suffering terrorism against it's people for decades, back into the 60's and 70's. Mostly because of it's support for Israel.

Yes I know it, by when u.s was already the most powerful country in the world. :)


Freedom of speech, religion, movement, privacy, media, political opinion, liberty, justice......

Hmm I dont get you, how could ît possibly be that by removing or limiting these, would terrorism go away or diminish? Or do you mean the government controlling these in order to allegedly fighting terrorism?

[pomeroo]

Yes I know it, by when u.s was already the most powerful country in the world. :)




Hmm I dont get you, how could ît possibly be that by removing or limiting these, would terrorism go away or diminish? Or do you mean the government controlling these in order to allegedly fighting terrorism?


You aren't planning to point out any errors in Bernacchia's paper, are you?

[LashL]

Oh no? So it is a lie from Jones?

If Jones claimed that, then yes it was indeed a lie by Jones (no surprise, that, since Jones tells a lot of porkies). Mr. DeMartini was most certainly not involved in any, way, shape or form in the design of the towers.

You would have known this had you you done even a modicum of research. And, no, blindly accepting and linking to Alex Jones, prisonplanet, or infowars videos does not constitute research.

[omegablue]

You aren't planning to point out any errors in Bernacchia's paper, are you?

Why are you still stuck on that Bernacchia´s discussion with Sagadevan? Is that because you think that the other conspiracy arguments are too compeling to be fought, and this is one of the most dubious and arguable of them? What is your point fella?

I think the only investigation that is of some importance regarding this issue, is whether they had or not the skills the instructor said they didnt have and thereafter saying that they did possess the required skills. And why in nine hells, the security was not vigilant to the point of not noticing the sudden uprising, and not being able to stop 19 not too sneaky muslins, embarking at the same time, all groups with decent numbers as for being able to hijack a plane, and some of them carrying federal flight licenses ( even if surprisingly they could not even control and land a cesna according to the instructors). This all added up by many comments like Rumsfeld´s one about they being warned of terrorist attacks, leaves a phony atmosphere everywhere on the official report of those issues.

I know what you will tell me. Something like: "Haven´t you read the commission report? It´s all there debunked! You are a misinformed fool." If so, you better do something more.

As an endnote, I repeat, those are not the most important things to be investigated about these conspiracy theories, imo. Still, you are too attached to it, and the why , I´m still waiting to find out. Just plain craving for rhetoric war?

[omegablue]

If Jones claimed that, then yes it was indeed a lie by Jones (no surprise, that, since Jones tells a lot of porkies). Mr. DeMartini was most certainly not involved in any, way, shape or form in the design of the towers.

You would have known this had you you done even a modicum of research. And, no, blindly accepting and linking to Alex Jones, prisonplanet, or infowars videos does not constitute research.

Ahh yes, I got ya!!! The videos and info which does constitute "research" are from the commission report!! Aah ok, how blind I am!

You made an accusation, now please back up your data? Has Jones lied on this one?

Answer: <place the evidence here>

[omegablue]

Look, this fellow is obnoxious and abusive. He's just baiting people -- baiting everyone. If there is any hint of content, it's political, not related to conspiracies, and the thread should wander over that-a-way.




Full stop! What did I write here to be taken as political, that does not address the conspiracies?

[pomeroo]

Why are you still stuck on that Bernacchia´s discussion with Sagadevan? Is that because you think that the other conspiracy arguments are too compeling to be fought, and this is one of the most dubious and arguable of them? What is your point fella?

I think the only investigation that is of some importance regarding this issue, is whether they had or not the skills the instructor said they didnt have and thereafter saying that they did possess the required skills. And why in nine hells, the security was not vigilant to the point of not noticing the sudden uprising, and not being able to stop 19 not too sneaky muslins, embarking at the same time, all groups with decent numbers as for being able to hijack a plane, and some of them carrying federal flight licenses ( even if surprisingly they could not even control and land a cesna according to the instructors). This all added up by many comments like Rumsfeld´s one about they being warned of terrorist attacks, leaves a phony atmosphere everywhere on the official report of those issues.

I know what you will tell me. Something like: "Haven´t you read the commission report? It´s all there debunked! You are a misinformed fool." If so, you better do something more.

As an endnote, I repeat, those are not the most important things to be investigated about these conspiracy theories, imo. Still, you are too attached to it, and the why , I´m still waiting to find out. Just plain craving for rhetoric war?


Conspiracy liars typically conjure up a blizzard of claims, all of them false. What they NEVER do is assemble those claims into a coherent theory.

What we attempt on this forum is to dismantle the fantasists' fairy castle stone-by-stone. They say there were no hijackers: we show how the hijackers were identified. They say that the phone calls from the planes were faked: we demonstrate that no technology exists that would permit the sort voice-morphing the conspiracy liars imagine. They say the planes that hit the Towers were remote-controlled: we show why Boeing 757s and 767s cannot be flown by remote control. And on and on...

Conspiracy liars have long pretended that Hani Hanjour could not have executed the maneuvers necessary to crash the hijacked aircraft into the Pentagon. Bernacchia, a highly experienced pilot and flight instructor, demonstrates that he most certainly could have.

You have given us nothing. Hot air about almost being shot (by whom?), implausible rubbish about the Patriot Act, empty personal attacks on the "Italian wierd [sic] guy--NOTHING!

We say that your absurd conspiracy theory is pack of lies based on bogus science and distorted quotes. We demand that you show us what you actually have.

[omegablue]

Conspiracy liars typically conjure up a blizzard of claims, all of them false. What they NEVER do is assemble those claims into a coherent theory.

Ah, again this silly argument. We cannot spot any holes in the official report, without presenting a coherent theory?!?!?! What kind of reasoning is that?


What we attempt on this forum is to dismantle the fantasists' fairy castle stone-by-stone.

Wow, sounds promising, but still...

They say there were no hijackers: we show how the hijackers were identified.

Identified by who? Links and references? I know I know!! The commission report again? Ohh... NIST this time? Nah.

They say that the phone calls from the planes were faked: we demonstrate that no technology exists that would permit the sort voice-morphing the conspiracy liars imagine.

The old and boring rhetoric technique of stupidly generalizing. Now here you call everyone that doubts the commission report as "conspiracy liars"! Ace move friend.

They say the planes that hit the Towers were remote-controlled: we show why Boeing 757s and 767s cannot be flown by remote control. And on and on...

Ah you shown? How? Note that I´m not defending these versions, but just asking you to back up your claims.

Conspiracy liars have long pretended that Hani Hanjour could not have executed the maneuvers necessary to crash the hijacked aircraft into the Pentagon.

Oh here he goes again with more rhetoric generalizations!! Why did Mr. Liars do that?? What a shame!

Again show me evidence for that! Not the commission report again, but independent and reasonably above-average evidence.

Bernacchia, a highly experienced pilot and flight instructor, demonstrates that he most certainly could have.

Both of em are experienced pilots. Now, Bernacchia may have more flight hours than Saga, but Saga is an aircraft engineer also... but hey, what is the point with that? Are these credential wars defining the veracity of the points made? This whole discussion is just about opinions. Both of em speculating what happened on 9/11. What can you see that is worth of great attention about this little discussion of these two guys?

You have given us nothing. Hot air about almost being shot (by whom?), implausible rubbish about the Patriot Act, empty personal attacks on the "Italian wierd [sic] guy--NOTHING!

Again, rhetoric bullbleep. This is the typical intimidation cheap attempt. Making the attacked appear a hopeless fool and shaking his morale, like he would say: "I give up, I give up". I did not use my personal experience of the results of the patriot act bullbleep as being evidence for anything. I just made a personal observation on the issue, which strangely seemed to offend you. What about my comments on the Italian WEIRD (thanks teacher) guy who WEIRDLY commented an article nitpicking everywhere and leaving behind the central issues of the problem? I know, you did not like it! So what?

We say that your absurd conspiracy theory is pack of lies based on bogus science and distorted quotes.

Wow!! Now I´ve been promoted to "Designer of Absurd Conspiracy Theories". HAHAHAHAHAHA


Now giving the discussed problems, please elaborate:

-pack of lies : <place the evidence here>
-bogus science : <place the evidence here>
-distorted quotes: <place the evidence here>

And again, is this theory mine? lol

We demand that you show us what you actually have

LOL, now I must have something to show?!?!?! Isn´t the other way around? Aren´t you the one making a series of accusations about me and that Mr. Conspiracy Liars, without any effort to back it up? If the commission report and a few opinions of your forum colleagues makes you overwhelmingly secure that you found the truth, thats too bad for YOU, not for me.

Gulp, I sense I am about to be hammered by overwhelming independent evidence this time. I´m doomed!!! Nah.

[gumboot]

I think the only investigation that is of some importance regarding this issue, is whether they had or not the skills the instructor said they didnt have and thereafter saying that they did possess the required skills.


All of their flight instructors believe they could have done what they did. Want to try again?




And why in nine hells, the security was not vigilant to the point of not noticing the sudden uprising


The sudden uprising occurred on the planes at 35,000ft, where there was no security.





and not being able to stop 19 not too sneaky muslins, embarking at the same time, all groups with decent numbers as for being able to hijack a plane, and some of them carrying federal flight licenses ( even if surprisingly they could not even control and land a cesna according to the instructors).


Do airline booking agents record the religious affiliation of passengers? Do you think flights should only be allowed a certain number of Muslims on board? How many? Do you think people with FAA licenses should not be allowed to fly as passengers on commercial airlines?

Please cite a single instructor for the 9/11 hijackers who claims they could not land a Cessna.

You don't know what you're talking about.

-Gumboot

[Cylinder]

The sudden uprising occurred on the planes at 35,000ft, where there was no security.

For all intents and purposes at least. The security protocol for in-flight hijacking scenarios pre-911 was to keep passengers calm and seated, id the original seat of the actors and to find a ruse to land where law enforcement can take over.

[Jonnyclueless]

Ah, again this silly argument. We cannot spot any holes in the official report, without presenting a coherent theory?!?!?! What kind of reasoning is that?



So please share with us your coherent theory then. Please tell us what happened and let's see how many holes we find in your presentation. This should be fun.

[PhantomWolf]

Yes I know it, by when u.s was already the most powerful country in the world. :)

Debatable, during the 60's and 70's the Power Block of the Soviet Union was just as strong.

Hmm I dont get you, how could ît possibly be that by removing or limiting these, would terrorism go away or diminish? Or do you mean the government controlling these in order to allegedly fighting terrorism?

It would diminish it because it would be stopped before it could happen, and those that were possibly troublemakers could be rounded up and locked up without trial or justice (can you say Gitmo using US citizens?)

These sort of things routinely happen in countries around the world. Go visit Zimbawe or Mynmar and demanding your rights.

[omegablue]

All of their flight instructors believe they could have done what they did. Want to try again?

Yes, I will try again. Show me evidence to support this claim!


Do airline booking agents record the religious affiliation of passengers? Do you think flights should only be allowed a certain number of Muslims on board? How many? Do you think people with FAA licenses should not be allowed to fly as passengers on commercial airlines?


They should know and do better. There were warnings about possible attacks. Rumsfeld did say that. Or this is just another lie from the conspiracy nuts?

Please cite a single instructor for the 9/11 hijackers who claims they could not land a Cessna.


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hanjour.html

Ahh I know I know, just conspiracy nonsense!



You don't know what you're talking about.

You do? Show me.

[Corsair 115]

Both of em are experienced pilots. Now, Bernacchia may have more flight hours than Saga, but Saga is an aircraft engineer also... but hey, what is the point with that? Are these credential wars defining the veracity of the points made? This whole discussion is just about opinions. Both of em speculating what happened on 9/11.You could easily answer for yourself how easy or hard it is to navigate an aircraft from one position to another and how easy or hard it is to crash said aircraft into a structure.

All you have to do is two things:

1) Take some ground courses to familiarize yourself with the basics of operating an aircraft (you probably could even get away with just reading the manual for, and logging some hours in, a computer flight sim like Microsoft Flight Simulator or similar program).

2) Buy or borrow some time in a 757 or 767 simulator. Since such simulators are expressly intended to mimic the performance of the real aircraft as closely as possible in order to train and familiarize pilots with that aircraft, getting time in such a sim is as close as you can get to flying the real thing without actually flying the real thing. Then you can find out for yourself how easy or hard it is to handle the aircraft.

So, will you take this challenge?

[pomeroo]

You could easily answer for yourself how easy or hard it is to navigate an aircraft from one position to another and how easy or hard it is to crash said aircraft into a structure.

All you have to do is two things:

1) Take some ground courses to familiarize yourself with the basics of operating an aircraft (you probably could even get away with just reading the manual for, and logging some hours in, a computer flight sim like Microsoft Flight Simulator or similar program).

2) Buy or borrow some time in a 757 or 767 simulator. Since such simulators are expressly intended to mimic the performance of the real aircraft as closely as possible in order to train and familiarize pilots with that aircraft, getting time in such a sim is as close as you can get to flying the real thing without actually flying the real thing. Then you can find out for yourself how easy or hard it is to handle the aircraft.

So, will you take this challenge?


Notice how Omega adamantly refuses to engage Bernacchia's arguments. He has not read Papcun's paper on the impossibility of the sort of voice-morphing the liars prattle about, but he wants to see the "evidence." He hasn't read Apathoid's paper refuting the myths about remote-controlled 757s and 767s, but he wants to see the "evidence." I don't know what he wants to see, but he definitely doesn't want to read anything

[omegablue]

You could easily answer for yourself how easy or hard it is to navigate an aircraft from one position to another and how easy or hard it is to crash said aircraft into a structure.

All you have to do is two things:

1) Take some ground courses to familiarize yourself with the basics of operating an aircraft (you probably could even get away with just reading the manual for, and logging some hours in, a computer flight sim like Microsoft Flight Simulator or similar program).

2) Buy or borrow some time in a 757 or 767 simulator. Since such simulators are expressly intended to mimic the performance of the real aircraft as closely as possible in order to train and familiarize pilots with that aircraft, getting time in such a sim is as close as you can get to flying the real thing without actually flying the real thing. Then you can find out for yourself how easy or hard it is to handle the aircraft.

So, will you take this challenge?

Did you do it? If so, which were your conclusions?

[pomeroo]

It's amusing that so many conspiracy liars who wouldn't dare to spout their idiocy in this forum are showing up to stuff the ballot box. Notice how every time someone votes 'no,' a 'yes' instantly appears to counter it.

[Drs_Res]

Don't blame me....I voted for Planet X :D

[chillzero]

Posts moved to Abandon All Hope. If the thread does not stay on topic, and the bickering doesn't stop, this thread will be placed on moderated status.

[Corsair 115]

Did you do it? If so, which were your conclusions?It doesn't matter what I think. I was pointing out that it is possible for you to answer the questions for yourself and to do so firsthand.

Will you do it?

[Jonnyclueless]

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hanjour.html

Ahh I know I know, just conspiracy nonsense!



Yes it is nonsense and it is from a Woo site. How convenient of them to edit a bunch of bits together to create a completely fabricated story. This is what I consider to be an outright lie because the article was written with the intent to intentionally mislead people and you are proof of that.

They take quotes from early on about instructors saying they weren't good, but just happen to leave out the part about them sticking with it and eventually getting their lisc. They leave out the part where the problem was Hani's lack of ability to speak english or desire to learn landing and ignore him having a private AND commercial pilots lisc. They leave out some interesting quotes:

"Hanjour successfully conducted a challenging certification flight supervised by an instructor at Congressional Air Charters of Gaithersburg, Maryland, landing at a small airport with a difficult approach.The instructor thought Hanjour may have had training from a military pilot because he used a terrain recognition system for navigation."

Oh BTW:

"Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said"
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/Newsday_com.htm

"As I've explained in at least one prior column, Hani Hanjour's flying was hardly the show-quality demonstration often described. It was exceptional only in its recklessness. If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation's capital revealed him to be exactly the ****** pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with help from the 757's autopilot. Striking a stationary object -- even a large one like the Pentagon -- at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon's lawn.

It's true there's only a vestigial similarity between the cockpit of a light trainer and the flight deck of a Boeing. To put it mildly, the attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league. However, they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category 3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system. For good measure, at least two of the terrorist pilots had rented simulator time in jet aircraft, but striking the Pentagon, or navigating along the Hudson River to Manhattan on a cloudless morning, with the sole intention of steering head-on into a building, did not require a mastery of airmanship. The perpetrators had purchased manuals and videos describing the flight management systems of the 757/767, and as any desktop simulator enthusiast will tell you, elementary operation of the planes' navigational units and autopilots is chiefly an exercise in data programming. You can learn it at home. You won't be good, but you'll be good enough.

"They'd done their homework and they had what they needed," says a United Airlines pilot (name withheld on request), who has flown every model of Boeing from the 737 up. "Rudimentary knowledge and fearlessness."

"As everyone saw, their flying was sloppy and aggressive," says Michael (last name withheld), a pilot with several thousand hours in 757s and 767s. "Their skills and experience, or lack thereof, just weren't relevant."

"The hijackers required only the shallow understanding of the aircraft," agrees Ken Hertz, an airline pilot rated on the 757/767. "In much the same way that a person needn't be an experienced physician in order to perform CPR or set a broken bone."

That sentiment is echoed by Joe d'Eon, airline pilot and host of the "Fly With Me" podcast series. "It's the difference between a doctor and a butcher," says d'Eon."
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/

There's plenty more. but you just might not find such info on whatreallyhappened.com as they are not allowed to report anything that doesn't support a conspiracy fantasy.


BTW, still waiting for your coherent theory.

[Thunder]

I would like to see the Bush administration answer some of the unanswered questions about 9-11.