David Ray Griffiths Answers All Our Questions

[Architect]

Well lads, this will doubtless be as substantial as all the other 911 "evidence" we get from the Truth movement, however who else fancies a wee school trip?


http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/12/358944.html

http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.0.html (http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.0.html)


You'll just love the quality and logic of the questions already posed by the Truthers......:eek:

[T.A.M.]

Well given how stale and old, and debunked his 105 points were, it will be refreshing to have some new material from him to quash.

TAM

[28th Kingdom]

not one single CT about 9/11 has been debunked...not a oney. not even something as crazy as teh star wars beam..nope still not debunked...in fact it's undebunkable...that's just how stubborn and pigheaded you all are...

learn the definition of debunked...you have proved nothing to be false....NOTHINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.... not the holographic wings...not eh missile pod...not the drone planes...nothing a b s o lelte y nothing you have prove dnothing..

and i'm not just syaing htat...it's the truth....

[Architect]

How did he see my thread if I'm on ignore then?

[Bell]

not one single CT about 9/11 has been debunked...not a oney. not even something as crazy as teh star wars beam..nope still not debunked...in fact it's undebunkable...that's just how stubborn and pigheaded you all are...

learn the definition of debunked...you have proved nothing to be false....NOTHINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.... not the holographic wings...not eh missile pod...not the drone planes...nothing a b s o lelte y nothing you have prove dnothing..

and i'm not just syaing htat...it's the truth....

Aren't you a wee bit to young to drink alcohol??

[defaultdotxbe]

How did he see my thread if I'm on ignore then?
i think theres a different option to hide threads started by ignored users, ive never ignored anyone so im not sure how it works, but i think he can see your first post and thats it

[Bell]

How did he see my thread if I'm on ignore then?

You can see if a person on your ignore list has made a post or a thread. You just can't see the content. You get a message something like "this member is on your ignore list"

Try it yourself, put me on ignore - but don't forget to take me off again :boxedin:

[Firestone]

Actually, there is an option to completely hide threads started by someone on your ignore-list.

I know it, I just put Architect on my ignore-list for a moment to test it. :)

[Architect]

I know it, I just put Architect on my ignore-list for a moment to test it. :)

S'okay, I'm used to it, I'm married.....:p

[JimBenArm]

S'okay, I'm used to it, I'm married.....:p

Won't be earning any more pints. I'm on ignore now, according to a post he put up on another thread.

Yeah!

[T.A.M.]

From American Heritage Dictionary:

de·bunk (dē-bŭngk') Pronunciation Key
tr.v. de·bunked, de·bunk·ing, de·bunks
To expose or ridicule the falseness, sham, or exaggerated claims of: debunk a supposed miracle drug.

From Dictionary.com

de·bunk /dɪˈbʌŋk/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-buhngk] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object)
to expose or excoriate (a claim, assertion, sentiment, etc.) as being pretentious, false, or exaggerated: to debunk advertising slogans.

You are the one who does not know the meaning of the word. Debunk does not mean to prove something to be catagorically false or untrue. If that were the case there would be many things in the truth movement we couldnt debunk simply because there is no way to prove a lack of evidence as a falsehood.
ie. I cannot prove that CD didnt occur, absolutely, but I can provide enough evidence to the contrary to make such a hypothesis seem extremely unlike, even foolish. SO I can Debunk it.

By the definitions given above, almost all CT claims are DEBUNKED!!

TAM

[JamesB]

not one single CT about 9/11 has been debunked...not a oney. not even something as crazy as teh star wars beam..nope still not debunked...in fact it's undebunkable...that's just how stubborn and pigheaded you all are...

learn the definition of debunked...you have proved nothing to be false....NOTHINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.... not the holographic wings...not eh missile pod...not the drone planes...nothing a b s o lelte y nothing you have prove dnothing..

and i'm not just syaing htat...it's the truth....

Actually you are correct in that it is undebunkable, in the sense that your hypotheses are not falsifiable. Any evidence which supports you is unquestionably accepted, no matter how weak or unrealiable. Any lack of evidence is taken as proof of a coverup. Any evidence which contradicts your hypothesis is automatically taken as faked. There is no evidence, no matter how powerful or reliable that you would accept to contradict your fervently held beliefs.

So yes, based on your standards of evidence, we cannot "debunk" you.

[T.A.M.]

So in the end, by his Definition of DEBUNKED, he cannot be. However, by the commonly held definition, I think to the general public reading, we have debunked a great many, if not all of their claims.

TAM

[beachnut]

not one single CT about 9/11 has been debunked...not a oney. not even something as crazy as teh star wars beam..nope still not debunked...in fact it's undebunkable...that's just how stubborn and pigheaded you all are...

learn the definition of debunked...you have proved nothing to be false....NOTHINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.... not the holographic wings...not eh missile pod...not the drone planes...nothing a b s o lelte y nothing you have prove dnothing..

and i'm not just syaing htat...it's the truth....

David Ray Griffith is self debunking; like all truthers! He tells you in his book it is hearsay! He has no proof; if he really said what his books imply he would be sued to death!

He is a hearsay book writer; he would take all 28th said and publish it! He is that good!

The man of no facts; I present, David Ray Griffith (he writes books that make people feel good about hating someone else; or something)

[28th Kingdom]

Actually, there is an option to completely hide threads started by someone on your ignore-list.

I don't think you can hide threads...but you can completely remove any trace of a user on your ignore list. Check under the control panel...you can either leave a note that the ignored member has posted (with the option to view the post) or you can make them disappear completely... I've chosen the latter and it's a D-LIGHT!

If someone on my ig-button starts a thread, and they're the only one who has posted...when you click on the thread, it will just be empty i.e. no posts.

[JimBenArm]

I don't think you can hide threads...but you can completely remove any trace of a user on your ignore list. Check under the control panel...you can either leave a note that the ignored member has posted (with the option to view the post) or you can make them disappear completely... I've chosen the latter and it's a D-LIGHT!

If someone on my ig-button starts a thread, and they're the only one who has posted...when you click on the thread, it will just be empty i.e. no posts.

Actually, this will be a delight. I can mock this moron mercilessly, and he'll never see it.

How cool is that?

:Banane42:

[Architect]

But if he's ignoring me, why is he posting on the thread I started?:)

You know, I'm tempted to start a bogus thread with a really sexy title that'll intrique him, just for annoyance value..........because the thread would be as full of facts as his own postings. :D

[Architect]

Actually, this will be a delight. I can mock this moron mercilessly, and he'll never see it.

How cool is that?

:Banane42:


Extremely.

Anyway, back to the thread. Do we fancy going and winding up ol' David Ray with some real hard questions, and if so what do we think he'll have greatest trouble answering? (i.e. how to show him as the deluded fraud some think he is).

[beachnut]

DRG is the hearsay king of CT truth.

No facts, just junk; has anyone found one thing DRG has that is worth a diime in finding truth?

Who buys his books?

Why would you believe a book whose author tells you it is just what people said? Just hearsay, talk, people's opinions, no facts or evidence. It is a true faith based bs junk pile of words.

Who is the DRG expert; With DRG you need not debunk, it is not needed.

28th, how many DRG books have you bought?

[beachnut]

I don't think you can hide threads...but you can completely remove any trace of a user on your ignore list. Check under the control panel...you can either leave a note that the ignored member has posted (with the option to view the post) or you can make them disappear completely... I've chosen the latter and it's a D-LIGHT!

If someone on my ig-button starts a thread, and they're the only one who has posted...when you click on the thread, it will just be empty i.e. no posts.

What does 28th think of DRG?

[beachnut]

What does 28th think of DRG?

[Firestone]

I don't think you can hide threads...but you can completely remove any trace of a user on your ignore list. Check under the control panel...you can either leave a note that the ignored member has posted (with the option to view the post) or you can make them disappear completely... I've chosen the latter and it's a D-LIGHT!

If someone on my ig-button starts a thread, and they're the only one who has posted...when you click on the thread, it will just be empty i.e. no posts.You can hide threads from people on your ignore list:
4782

[28th Kingdom]

Actually you are correct in that it is undebunkable, in the sense that your hypotheses are not falsifiable. Any evidence which supports you is unquestionably accepted, no matter how weak or unrealiable. Any lack of evidence is taken as proof of a coverup. Any evidence which contradicts your hypothesis is automatically taken as faked. There is no evidence, no matter how powerful or reliable that you would accept to contradict your fervently held beliefs.

So yes, based on your standards of evidence, we cannot "debunk" you.

Providing an alternate theory... in NO WAY proves the first theory to be false.

I haven't even read over the 9/11 debunking sites, but I have scanned over a couple pages that have been linked from this forum... and this so-called, "debunking," is just beyond pitiful. It's basically a guy saying,

"Well... here is what the CT says... and well, I just think that's crazy because... opinion 1... opinion 2... opinion 3... so there I proved them wrong...because I was able to provide an alternative theory (regardless if it's 80 times as absurd i.e. the magical potion of silvery molten aluminum mixed with partially burned computers and carpets that glows orange) to account for that event."

"Koolaid - shaken... not stirred."

[Architect]

You can hide threads from people on your ignore list:


Ach, dinnae tell him that. I was going to start a bogus thread with the title "28th: Spook Shrill" just to see if he responded!

Actually, I like that idea.....would I get into trouble for it?

[defaultdotxbe]

Providing an alternate theory... in NO WAY proves the first theory to be false.
so then by the same logic no CTers has ever, nor will ever, debunk the official story, correct?

[Firestone]

Firestone please multi quote the best of 28th ignore list for 28th;That's really a Mission Impossible.
I would have to quote half the conspiracy-forum.

But I'm sure there is no need. He reads it all! :)

[JimBenArm]

Back to the thread topic. If we did submit questions, wouldn't they just delete them? They sure don't like anything like actual facts, for some reason. Like all the people banned from their forums.

[babazaroni]

off topic deleted

[ConspiRaider]

Back to the thread topic. If we did submit questions, wouldn't they just delete them? They sure don't like anything like actual facts, for some reason. Like all the people banned from their forums.
If you look through that questions thread, you will discover a few sane people who contributed. Very sane. Very few.

[Firestone]

Back to the thread topic. If we did submit questions, wouldn't they just delete them? They sure don't like anything like actual facts, for some reason. Like all the people banned from their forums.Well, lets try it!

I posted an easy question (http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.0.html;msg175#msg175). Maybe the specialists here should post more tricky ones. :)

[Architect]

Done:

http://www.rinf.com/forum/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.15.html

[JamesB]

Providing an alternate theory... in NO WAY proves the first theory to be false.

I haven't even read over the 9/11 debunking sites, but I have scanned over a couple pages that have been linked from this forum... and this so-called, "debunking," is just beyond pitiful. It's basically a guy saying,

"Well... here is what the CT says... and well, I just think that's crazy because... opinion 1... opinion 2... opinion 3... so there I proved them wrong...because I was able to provide an alternative theory (regardless if it's 80 times as absurd i.e. the magical potion of silvery molten aluminum mixed with partially burned computers and carpets that glows orange) to account for that event."

"Koolaid - shaken... not stirred."

Actually, that is not how most of the debunking sites work. Since I write for one of them, I happen to be an expert on them. What most of them do is say, "These are the claims of the conspiracy theorists, these are unrealiable sources of information these theories are based on, these are the logical fallacies and outright lies that they are using to make their conclusions. These are the more reliable theories and logical conclusions that you should have made.

[JimBenArm]

Well, lets try it!

I posted an easy question (http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.0.html;msg175#msg175). Maybe the specialists here should post more tricky ones. :)

I know they can! I'm going to keep watch on this, and see what happens. I hope they prove my cynicism wrong.

[beachnut]

good questions

[dubfan]

Actually you are correct in that it is undebunkable, in the sense that your hypotheses are not falsifiable. Any evidence which supports you is unquestionably accepted, no matter how weak or unrealiable. Any lack of evidence is taken as proof of a coverup. Any evidence which contradicts your hypothesis is automatically taken as faked. There is no evidence, no matter how powerful or reliable that you would accept to contradict your fervently held beliefs.

So yes, based on your standards of evidence, we cannot "debunk" you.

Replied to and quoted to highlight a recent signature addition, attributed to J. Swift.

I think it has some bearing on the nutjob you're replying to.

[SezMe]

Didja notice this phrase:

The 9/11 truthling movement ...
truthling??? Is that like truthiness only with a clapper?

[Larry Lovage]

28th Kingdom sure has been saying some strange things on this thread. I entirely agree with him about the unfalsifiability of the CTs. Then he saidProviding an alternate theory... in NO WAY proves the first theory to be false. ... which I actually assumed had been written by a debunker, because the CTs go on and on about how the "official" theory is the first theory, and it's perfectly sensible that theories on their own don't disprove older theories simply by dint of appearing later. Are we revealing 28th as a "fake" truther? (I put fake in quotes just to drive pedants like me crazy.)

I'd ask DRG why he was fatuous enough to start his book 9/11 Commission Omissions and Distortions with the hijackers "turning up alive". Though even the BBC reported on this before taking a step back and realising how idiotic it is. This is not a case of the police framing evidence for a crime against some specific person who is pleading his innocence. The committers of this crime are dead, so if you show up saying, "Hey, you said I committed this crime. Not only did I not commit this crime, I wasn't even in the States at the time, and I'm not even a terrorist." To which, presumably, the FBI say, "Uh, the fact that you're alive more or less proves you didn't commit the crime. I'll take you at your word you're not a terrorist as well. It's pretty clear we weren't talking about you, but about another guy with the same name as you. We've talked to our guy's friends, associates and family. He's definitely dead. Go about your business."

[ConspiRaider]

Didja notice this phrase:


truthling??? Is that like truthiness only with a clapper?
I heard that the 9/11 Truthling Movement was setup for the kiddies of Real Truthers. Under 8 years old to join. Accepted upon approval of dissertation on credibility of Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and The Great Pumpkin.

Was later disbanded when the 9/11 CT statements made by the Truthlings were deemed, by the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, to be indistinguishable from their own. Copyright infringement and all that.

[Brainster]

Didja notice this phrase:

truthling??? Is that like truthiness only with a clapper?

Truthling is a Nico Haupt (aka Ewing 2001) term. I think it vaguely implies Truthers who don't support the same stuff Nico does (which means just about everybody in Denial Land).

[28th Kingdom]

28th Kingdom sure has been saying some strange things on this thread. I entirely agree with him about the unfalsifiability of the CTs. Then he said... which I actually assumed had been written by a debunker, because the CTs go on and on about how the "official" theory is the first theory, and it's perfectly sensible that theories on their own don't disprove older theories simply by dint of appearing later. Are we revealing 28th as a "fake" truther? (I put fake in quotes just to drive pedants like me crazy.)

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!

[Oliver]

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!

Uhm - your background information seems to
be pretty small concerning the "official" version. :boxedin:

[Redtail]

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!

If that were true CTers would be able to convince people other than themselves.

ETA: Also they wouldn't run and hide from backing up their theories mathematicly.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!

There's a well reasoned argument. :p

[A W Smith]

No CT proves the official story to be false.


There you go. Self debunked. I think we are all done here. Can we move on now? NEXT!!

[defaultdotxbe]

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!
too bad no CTer has any

[Mobyseven]

Providing an alternate theory... in NO WAY proves the first theory to be false.

So - you will never be able to falsify the official report, then?

By your own logic.






As an aside...I started writing this, and The Ramones came on..."I Wanna Be Sedated"...pretty much how I feel most of the time talking to CTers...

[PerryLogan]

Not debunked? The 9/11 "inside job" theory has never even been bunked!

The most incompetent administration in American history pulled off the trickiest hoax in world history, using a preposterous and absurd cover story, leaving tons of obvious evidence, letting the whole thing be taped--and fooled everyone in the world except a few white guys who got on the web.

That's why people like to laugh at the Truthers. The scenario is just too dumb for words.

[Mince]

Internet users have the opportunity to put questions to one of the Worlds most prominent and credible 9/11 researchers, Professor David Ray Griffin.



Gee, I wonder who wrote that introduction.



*emphasis added

[CptColumbo]

Some one should send, "Who are you really working for?"

[GlennB]

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!

Whatever happened to "Sir ... I prithee bide with me a while such that I might discourse on the subject of .... <blah>" ????

[Mince]

not one single CT about 9/11 has been debunked...not a oney...


As Mr. Logan elucidated above, you cannot disprove what has never been proven. Not on single CT about 9/11 has been proven. That is why it is called a theory.*




*Actually, I am uncomfortable calling "truther" speculation, misinterpretation, misrepresentation, unsubstantiated claims and hyperbole, "theory." At least in a scientific sense, "a theory" is generally considered true, or at least probable, and is widely accepted as such. Very little of CT drivel is comparable.

[28th Kingdom]

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!

Let me further elaborate on this, since someone decided to cherry pick my quote...and present it out of context. No CT proves the official story to be false but you know what does? Common sense, yes... but something else... and that is TANGIBLE EVIDENCE! This evidence doesn't prove the CT to be true... but it does prove the OS to be false.

Well, maybe I should further clarify for the linear-thinking fastidiousos* in attendance... evidence + common sense = official story is a lie (false)

*And, yes... in case yer wondering - I did manifest this word from the ether... because as a wordsmith - I've been endowed with this power.

[beachnut]

Let me further elaborate on this, since someone decided to cherry pick my quote...and present it out of context. No CT proves the official story to be false but you know what does? Common sense, yes... but something else... and that is TANGIBLE EVIDENCE! This evidence doesn't prove the CT to be true... but it does prove the OS to be false.

Well, maybe I should further clarify for the linear-thinking fastidiousos in attendance... evidence + common sense = official story is a lie (false)

Wrong again!

No facts, just plain wrong for all time.

Has DRG answered any questions?

[Bell]

Let me further elaborate on this, since someone decided to cherry pick my quote...and present it out of context.

You broke the irony meter again :rolleyes:

:id:

No CT proves the official story to be false but you know what does? Common sense, yes... but something else... and that is TANGIBLE EVIDENCE! This evidence doesn't prove the CT to be true... but it does prove the OS to be false.

Well, maybe I should further clarify for the linear-thinking fastidiousos in attendance... evidence + lack of common sense + paranoia + delusion = official story is a lie (false)

Fixed it for you.

[HeyLeroy]

No CT proves the official story to be false. But, you know what does?

COMMON F****** SENSE!

Let me further elaborate on this, since someone decided to cherry pick my quote...and present it out of context. No CT proves the official story to be false but you know what does? Common sense, yes... but something else... and that is TANGIBLE EVIDENCE! This evidence doesn't prove the CT to be true... but it does prove the OS to be false.

Well, maybe I should further clarify for the linear-thinking fastidiousos in attendance... evidence + common sense = official story is a lie (false)

I don't know how you can accuse anyone of cherry-picking that. That was your entire post.

[JimBenArm]

I've been endowed with this power.

He's been endowed with the power to entertain us!

Dance! Dance, monkey, dance for us! :Banane42:

[The Pig]

He also achieved the biggest breakthough of 9/11 truth ever seen on British television, live on the BBC in September 2006.I must have missed it. Was he a part of the winning Red Tomato team on Ready Steady Cook?

[T.A.M.]

Let me further elaborate on this, since someone decided to cherry pick my quote...and present it out of context. No CT proves the official story to be false but you know what does? Common sense, yes... but something else... and that is TANGIBLE EVIDENCE! This evidence doesn't prove the CT to be true... but it does prove the OS to be false.

Well, maybe I should further clarify for the linear-thinking fastidiousos* in attendance... evidence + common sense = official story is a lie (false)

*And, yes... in case yer wondering - I did manifest this word from the ether... because as a wordsmith - I've been endowed with this power.

Problem is the entire CT movement cant find one scraping of TANGLBILE EVIDENCE to prove their Stories/Theories, so now what?

TAM

[ConspiRaider]

Well, maybe I should further clarify for the linear-thinking fastidiousos* in attendance... evidence + common sense = official story is a lie (false)

THANK YOU!

By employing the double negative, you have FINALLY come around to our way of thinking!

Put another way, you are correct in stating that the decree "The official story is a lie" actually is a FALSE decree!

I knew there was a reason I got up today!!!

[28th Kingdom]

You all believe that 19 amateur pilots with box cutters - out-smarted the most powerful and sophisticated defense system the world has ever known... a defense who has access to the most advanced weapons and technologies ever created.

This is really what you all think. I'm not making this up... I promise. You think the most powerful country in the world is so incompetent (of course, we all know...the quickest and most effective way to become the richest and most powerful country in the world is through incompetence) that 19 cavemen with cavemen tools can pull off a successful attack on one of the countries most recognized and famous landmarks... not to mention a little thing known as The Pentagon i.e. THE HEADQUARTERS FOR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE!

Still not making it up... you believe this... wait, not only do you believe this, you believe anyone who thinks this is impossible is a low-grade moron.

Anyone who thinks that it's impossible for an army of amateur cavemen with cavemen weaponry to pull off a successful attack on the world's most powerful military defense system equipped with billions of dollars of weapons and technologies... is a moron.

We're still just discussing the truth here... you believe that anyone who thinks it's impossible for a group of 4/5 men with carpenter tools - to attack the headquarters of the most elite military defense system in the world is a loon.

A military backed with an intelligence agency who told the defense that these men were planning an attack... and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.

This is all very interesting stuff indeed.

[NickUK]

Cavemen?

[Pardalis]

very interesting stuff:

http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Argument_from_incredulity

BTW, alot of Muslims are going to take badly the term "cavemen", I personally find it offensive and racist.

[Bell]

You all believe that 19 amateur pilots with box cutters - out-smarted the most powerful and sophisticated defense system the world has ever known... a defense who has access to the most advanced weapons and technologies ever created.

This is really what you all think. I'm not making this up... I promise. You think the most powerful country in the world is so incompetent (of course, we all know...the quickest and most effective way to become the richest and most powerful country in the world is through incompetence) that 19 cavemen with cavemen tools can pull off a successful attack on one of the countries most recognized and famous landmarks... not to mention a little thing known as The Pentagon i.e. THE HEADQUARTERS FOR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE!

Still not making it up... you believe this... wait, not only do you believe this, you believe anyone who thinks this is impossible is a low-grade moron.

Anyone who thinks that it's impossible for an army of amateur cavemen with cavemen weaponry to pull off a successful attack on the world's most powerful military defense system equipped with billions of dollars of weapons and technologies... is a moron.

We're still just discussing the truth here... you believe that anyone who thinks it's impossible for a group of 4/5 men with carpenter tools - to attack the headquarters of the most elite military defense system in the world is a loon.

A military backed with an intelligence agency who told the defense that these men were planning an attack... and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.

This is all very interesting stuff indeed.

So you are a racist as well?? Hmm, that would be explained by your IQ of 28.

To bad you weren't on one of those four flights. I'm sure your acclaimed superiour technology would have prevented the take over.

[defaultdotxbe]

You all believe that 19 amateur pilots with box cutters
4 pilots, 15 "passenger wranglers"

out-smarted the most powerful and sophisticated defense system the world has ever known... a defense who has access to the most advanced weapons and technologies ever created.
so what part of that defense system was to prevent planes from being hijacked? what part was geared towards shooting down civilian planes?

this argument is a red herring, by your logic the city that spends the most money on its police force should have 0 crime

This is really what you all think. I'm not making this up... I promise. You think the most powerful country in the world is so incompetent (of course, we all know...the quickest and most effective way to become the richest and most powerful country in the world is through incompetence) that 19 cavemen with cavemen tools can pull off a successful attack on one of the countries most recognized and famous landmarks... not to mention a little thing known as The Pentagon i.e. THE HEADQUARTERS FOR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE!
not so much incompetance as complacency, and being the most powerful and most influencial country in the world breeds a great deal of complacency

Anyone who thinks that it's impossible for an army of amateur cavemen with cavemen weaponry
why do you refer to them as cavemen? i dont think any of the hijackers spent any time in a cave, and bin laden didnt start hiding in caves until after 9/11 when we started gunning for him

and if you think boxcutters and bomb threats are insufficient to hijack an airliner, you dont even need the box cutters, plenty of people have hijacked planes just claiming to have bombs in suitcases, shoes, even in a teddy bear

We're still just discussing the truth here... you believe that anyone who thinks it's impossible for a group of 4/5 men with carpenter tools - to attack the headquarters of the most elite military defense system in the world is a loon.
yes, because it obviously wasnt impossible

A military backed with an intelligence agency who told the defense that these men were planning an attack... and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.
and what excercises might those be? got any sources? or are we just supposed to blindly trust whatever you tell us?

[JimBenArm]

You all believe that 19 amateur pilots with box cutters - out-smarted the most powerful and sophisticated defense system the world has ever known... a defense who has access to the most advanced weapons and technologies ever created.

Hmm, so now it was military jets they hijacked. Must have missed that somewhere.

This is really what you all think. I'm not making this up... I promise. You think the most powerful country in the world is so incompetent (of course, we all know...the quickest and most effective way to become the richest and most powerful country in the world is through incompetence) that 19 cavemen with cavemen tools can pull off a successful attack on one of the countries most recognized and famous landmarks... not to mention a little thing known as The Pentagon i.e. THE HEADQUARTERS FOR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE!

Racist much? Really. So, on the one hand, they're competent enough to get pilot licenses, but on the other, only use caveman tools. Got it.


Still not making it up... you believe this... wait, not only do you believe this, you believe anyone who thinks this is impossible is a low-grade moron.

Anyone who thinks that it's impossible for an army of amateur cavemen with cavemen weaponry to pull off a successful attack on the world's most powerful military defense system equipped with billions of dollars of weapons and technologies... is a moron.


And how was all of this weaponry supposed to stop the hijackings?

Talk about morons. All this from someone who would blow his own foot off if given a loaded weapon.

We're still just discussing the truth here... you believe that anyone who thinks it's impossible for a group of 4/5 men with carpenter tools - to attack the headquarters of the most elite military defense system in the world is a loon.

So now we're to flying hammers and saws actually hit the Pentagon. And he's calling us loons?


A military backed with an intelligence agency who told the defense that these men were planning an attack... and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.

This is all very interesting stuff indeed.



Yes, yes it is. Just not how you think it is.

Too bad Macaroon can't see this.

[ConspiRaider]

Anyone who thinks that it's impossible for an army of amateur cavemen with cavemen weaponry to pull off a successful attack on the world's most powerful military defense system equipped with billions of dollars of weapons and technologies... is a moron.

We're still just discussing the truth here... you believe that anyone who thinks it's impossible for a group of 4/5 men with carpenter tools - to attack the headquarters of the most elite military defense system in the world is a loon.
I must point out that the cavemen were not "amateur cavemen" but were fully licensed cavemen (their certificates were later discovered painted on an underground cave wall right next to the one of the Bison And The Hunter Who Never Saw The Tiger Of The Sabre Tooth Behind Him).

And you did say there was an army of them. Now granted, cavemen with cavemen weapons, but an army adds up to a lot of dudes with really bad attitudes (hah, rhymes). Something to consider.

You mentioned carpenter tools. Well, can you prove they did NOT use something like pneumatic nail guns? Those things are nasty, remember Lethal Weapon 2?

[JimBenArm]

I must point out that the cavemen were not "amateur cavemen" but were fully licensed cavemen (their certificates were later discovered painted on an underground cave wall right next to the one of the Bison And The Hunter Who Never Saw The Tiger Of The Sabre Tooth Behind Him).


Were they 1st Class licenses or the EQUIVENT?

[LashL]

Hmm, so now it was military jets they hijacked. Must have missed that somewhere.



Racist much? Really. So, on the one hand, they're competent enough to get pilot licenses, but on the other, only use caveman tools. Got it.



And how was all of this weaponry supposed to stop the hijackings?

Talk about morons. All this from someone who would blow his own foot off if given a loaded weapon.



So now we're to flying hammers and saws actually hit the Pentagon. And he's calling us loons?




Yes, yes it is. Just not how you think it is.

Too bad Macaroon can't see this.

He can see it now :)

[Perforatu]

and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.
Source?

[JimBenArm]

He can see it now :)

Thanks! Of course, he'll probably put you on ignore now, too.

[28th Kingdom]

Wait a minute... let me reframe this even more for you... To all of the current and retired military personal on here - who believe that 19 amateurs with primitive weaponry outsmarted your own multi-billion dollar defense system - whose side are you on, anyway? Are you defending these 19 men? Are you saying, yes... they are smarter than the US military? They are so clever... that they can invent an indefensible way of attacking the headquarters of the military for which you are a part of?

So, what are you saying about yourselves then? Really now... what does it say about you all who bad mouth your leaders by calling them incompetent - and who would rather believe that 19 amateurs with no professional military experience can out maneuver your world-class defense - than to think that a handful of corrupt men at the top of this system - handcuffed your military so that they couldn't stop these attacks from happening?

You would rather degrade the men and women of your armed services by saying they are incapable of defending against even the most amateur of attacks, than to believe that your government has been hijacked by a group of ruthless outlaws who are hellbent on running this country into the ground.

You would rather defend these demons, than stand up for the brave men and women who serve your country with loyalty, honor and courage.

Really now... who's the sick & twisted?

[28th Kingdom]

Source?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm

[defaultdotxbe]

Wait a minute... let me reframe this even more for you... To all of the current and retired military personal on here - who believe that 19 amateurs with primitive weaponry outsmarted your own multi-billion dollar defense system - whose side are you on, anyway? Are you defending these 19 men? Are you saying, yes... they are smarter than the US military? They are so clever... that they can invent an indefensible way of attacking the headquarters of the military for which you are a part of?

So, what are you saying about yourselves then? Really now... what does it say about you all who bad mouth your leaders by calling them incompetent - and who would rather believe that 19 amateurs with no professional military experience can out maneuver your world-class defense - than to think that a handful of corrupt men at the top of this system - handcuffed your military so that they couldn't stop these attacks from happening?

You would rather degrade the men and women of your armed services by saying they are incapable of defending against even the most amateur of attacks, than to believe that your government has been hijacked by a group of ruthless outlaws who are hellbent on running this country into the ground.

You would rather defend these demons, than stand up for the brave men and women who serve your country with loyalty, honor and dignity.

Really now... who's the sick & twisted?
have the most advanced forces in the world doesnt guarantee victory

just look what happened in vietnam

[ConspiRaider]

"I must point out that the cavemen were not "amateur cavemen" but were fully licensed cavemen (their certificates were later discovered painted on an underground cave wall right next to the one of the Bison And The Hunter Who Never Saw The Tiger Of The Sabre Tooth Behind Him)."

Were they 1st Class licenses or the EQUIVENT?
Ya gotta get up pretty early in the reveille to fool a sub driver.

7 of the 19 cavemen hijackers had EQUIVENT cavemen certificates, the CIA (Cave Idiot Artists) later revealed.

They were in fact mastodons who had sawn off their own tusks to sort of "blend in" with the australopithicene community. The trunks were hard to explain. But I heard they did pretty well with the ladies.

[defaultdotxbe]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm


and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.


NORAD, in a written statement, confirmed that such hijacking exercises occurred. It said the scenarios outlined were regional drills, not regularly scheduled continent-wide exercises.

so you do you not read the things you link to? or just hope we wont read them?

BTW, heres the biggest difference that we've been tryign to explain to you:


The exercises differed from the Sept. 11 attacks in one important respect: The planes in the simulation were coming from a foreign country.

in other words, the threat was comign form outside US airspace, NORADs mandate has always been to defend against FOREIGN airborne threats, they were never set up nor prepared to defend from an internal threat

[beachnut]

You all believe that 19 amateur pilots with box cutters - out-smarted the most powerful and sophisticated defense system the world has ever known... a defense who has access to the most advanced weapons and technologies ever created.


AThis is all very interesting stuff indeed.

I would like to see your defense of box cutters against your neck? How are you going to sew up you neck smart man? There are marines who can kill you in less than a minute and not leave a very big mark! You are dumb.

Amateur pilots? They had training and certificates, you are a dolt; do you even know the first thing about 9/11?

Pilots; anyone could fly the planes into buildings, kids could do it no certificate required, they wasted their money; but they learned how to turn off the transponder making it harder to track them on RADAR. Guess they learned how to read to learn the cockpit and use some of the junk in a cockpit; navigation aid etc.. Yes learning how to fly would help them find things. They wanted to make a point, you missed it! You disrespect the entire United States and only prove you are the dumbest dolt on earth. You are the one most likely to die of terminal stupidity.

Sorry before 9/11 no body was ready to shoot down airliners over the United States; you watch too much tv and movies; only a dolt would be dumb enough to state you last post. Sorry, we can not defend against the unknown event not planned for. Even the best in the world!

You have no idea what is going on! What a puff brain. You are the number one dumb CT guy I have found to date; or at least you will be in the top ten until your next sock makes an appearance; Are you really the brain dead pdoh?

You could be the one person incapable of flying aircraft into buildings; even a caveman could do it!

[JimBenArm]

Wait a minute... let me reframe this even more for you... To all of the current and retired military personal on here - who believe that 19 amateurs with primitive weaponry outsmarted your own multi-billion dollar defense system - whose side are you on, anyway? Are you defending these 19 men? Are you saying, yes... they are smarter than the US military? They are so clever... that they can invent an indefensible way of attacking the headquarters of the military for which you are a part of?

I am most certainly not on "their" side. They found a way to attack us that had never been used before. We had no defense standing ready for it. So, yes, they were clever. Yes, they did outsmart us. Happens in warfare, a lot. Then, you learn from the mistake, and move on.

So, what are you saying about yourselves then? Really now... what does it say about you all who bad mouth your leaders by calling them incompetent - and who would rather believe that 19 amateurs with no professional military experience can out maneuver your world-class defense - than to think that a handful of corrupt men at the top of this system - handcuffed your military so that they couldn't stop these attacks from happening?

So, you would rather believe that the men serving are more loyal to their corrupt men at the top than they are to the country they serve? This isn't a slur to them?


You would rather degrade the men and women of your armed services by saying they are incapable of defending against even the most amateur of attacks, than to believe that your government has been hijacked by a group of ruthless outlaws who are hellbent on running this country into the ground.

You would rather defend these demons, than stand up for the brave men and women who serve your country with loyalty, honor and dignity.

Really now... who's the sick & twisted?

I think we know who is sick and twisted. You are going to lecture us on loyalty, honor, and dignity? Suddenly YOU are the one who knows?

I don't like the fact that on 9/11 we were successfully attacked. I don't like how it happened. But it did. We got caught with our pants down by a resourceful and clever enemy. No conspiracy, no "evil genius" in the White House, no Jewish Cabal, false flag operation, flying hammers and saws.

But, hey, if I'm wrong, prove it.

Not that you can. You've already given us you "evidence", so now you stoop to crapping on the honor of everyone else.

Such a fine young man you are!

Done ranting.

Someone post this so he can see it.

[ConspiRaider]

I am most certainly not on "their" side. They found a way to attack us that had never been used before. We had no defense standing ready for it. So, yes, they were clever. Yes, they did outsmart us. Happens in warfare, a lot. Then, you learn from the mistake, and move on.

So, you would rather believe that the men serving are more loyal to their corrupt men at the top than they are to the country they serve? This isn't a slur to them?

I think we know who is sick and twisted. You are going to lecture us on loyalty, honor, and dignity? Suddenly YOU are the one who knows?

I don't like the fact that on 9/11 we were successfully attacked. I don't like how it happened. But it did. We got caught with our pants down by a resourceful and clever enemy. No conspiracy, no "evil genius" in the White House, no Jewish Cabal, false flag operation, flying hammers and saws.

But, hey, if I'm wrong, prove it.

Not that you can. You've already given us you "evidence", so now you stoop to crapping on the honor of everyone else.

Such a fine young man you are!

Done ranting.

Someone post this so he can see it.
Done, Jim.

The "box cutter" deal. I wonder if our mastodon-masquerading caveman accuser will click here for another viewpoint:

http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/nether_fictoid9.htm

[beachnut]

Wait a minute... let me reframe this even more for you... To all of the current and retired military personal on here - who believe that 19 amateurs with primitive weaponry outsmarted your own multi-billion dollar defense system - whose side are you on, anyway? Are you defending these 19 men? Are you saying, yes... they are smarter than the US military? They are so clever... that they can invent an indefensible way of attacking the headquarters of the military for which you are a part of?


Really now... who's the sick & twisted?

You are sick and demented; totally devoid of respect!

You are the only one I know of dumber than the 19 terrorist. The only one in the world;

Set you straight: Flight 93 were the first ones to get a clue; they defeated the terrorist once we all figured out the game! We win when we know the rules!

Won; flight 93 makes us winners against terrorist!

Flight 93 makes us all winners! Makes 28th a looser and the dumbest CT guy around!

How can you be so stupid? Flight 93 figured it all out in minutes, you have had five years to screw it up real bad!!!!!

[28th Kingdom]

so you do you not read the things you link to? or just hope we wont read them?

BTW, heres the biggest difference that we've been tryign to explain to you:



in other words, the threat was comign form outside US airspace, NORADs mandate has always been to defend against FOREIGN airborne threats, they were never set up nor prepared to defend from an internal threat

You keep it up... defending the supposed enemy while criticizing your own military. Doing everything in your power to try and prove that your defense was clueless and that the 19 hijackers were genius madmen.

Yer not even aware of what you speak, are you? You're so caught up in trying to prove me wrong... that you can't even see - all this time - I've been the one defending your country while you sit there blindly defending the enemy.

[beachnut]

28th is sick and twisted!

Flight 93 figured out the plot and attacked the terrorist! 28th is attacking the United States after having five years to figure it out; he must be a terrorist! The not so smart terrorist late for his flight, forgot to bring his brain to the debate.

I keep forgeting the thread is about DRG; when will he answer the questions? Funny DRG and 28th share the same plight; no facts!

[beachnut]

You keep it up... defending the supposed enemy while criticizing your own military. Doing everything in your power to try and prove that your defense was clueless and that the 19 hijackers were genius madmen.

Yer not even aware of what you speak, are you? You're so caught up in trying to prove me wrong... that you can't even see - all this time - I've been the one defending your country while you sit there blindly defending the enemy.


DRG; what is DRG have to do with your worthless drops of rotten brain matter dripping from your keyboard?

DRG has only hearsay, you have the twisted little brain of a parrot of CT crap.

DRG; 28th when will DRG answer the questions?

Does your mother know you flunked out of school?

[JimBenArm]

Done, Jim.

The "box cutter" deal. I wonder if our mastodon-masquerading caveman accuser will click here for another viewpoint:

http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/nether_fictoid9.htm

Thanks! Pleasure serving with you, sir!

Interesting link. I hadn't heard that before, but it makes sense. Of course, the deniers make much of the box cutters, but prior to 9/11, I wouldn't take on someone with one. I'd have stayed put.

Of course, the fact they said they had bombs doesn't count for anything, does it?

After all, they were cavemen!

Oh, I wonder if GEICO knows about this. Gotta be a trademark infringement!

[LashL]

Thanks! Of course, he'll probably put you on ignore now, too.

That's quite all right - I've always wanted a funky badge created by the inimitable Oliver.

[defaultdotxbe]

Thanks! Pleasure serving with you, sir!

Interesting link. I hadn't heard that before, but it makes sense. Of course, the deniers make much of the box cutters, but prior to 9/11, I wouldn't take on someone with one. I'd have stayed put.

Of course, the fact they said they had bombs doesn't count for anything, does it?

After all, they were cavemen!

Oh, I wonder if GEICO knows about this. Gotta be a trademark infringement!
im pretty sure one of the (fake) phone calls placed by a (nonexistant) victim on of the the (remote-controlled drone) planes mentioned boxcutters

just more of the doublethink from the truther department, they dont believe anything else, but theyll take that one tidbit and run with it

say 28th, did you ever find the other 2 times rumsfeld said 93 was shot down?

[beachnut]

http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.0.html;msg175#msg175

more questions; great questions;

I was still wondering if 28th could tell us when DRG will answer one?

[DavidJames]

I've been the one defending your country while you sit there blindly defending the enemy.Coward.

You claim to know the "truth" but you are doing nothing to bring anyone to justice. You claim to know the "truth" and what do you do with that knowledge? Perform mental masturbation on an Internet forum. That's because you are a sniveling coward. Your mommy and daddy must be so proud of their pathetic, soiled pants coward of a son.

Defending your country, HA, wipe you nose and change your diapers, coward. You are sleeping with the enemy, you are soiling the graves of the real heroes with your immature whining. Grow up loser.

If your so brave, why don't you wipe you butt, put on some pants and get out in the real world and take your case to people who can do something. You won't because you are a coward. It's so brave of you to accuse innocent people behind the safety of a drool covered keyboard. Because you are afraid to step out in the real world with your "knowledge", you are aiding and abetting those you feel are guilty.

[Perforatu]

and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.
Hi 28th Kingdom, can you provide another source for this? Having read the USA Today article you linked to twice, I still can not find any support for your claim.

Slick move trying to switch tables with the patriotic sentiments, by the way. Except... Quite a few of us are not from the U.S., so it doesn't work on us.

[28th Kingdom]

Hi 28th Kingdom, can you provide another source for this? Having read the USA Today article you linked to twice, I still can not find any support for your claim.

Slick move trying to switch tables with the patriotic sentiments, by the way. Except... Quite a few of us are not from the U.S., so it doesn't work on us.

I apologize...I only have articles written in English... since that's obviously not your first language... I guess you'll just have to take my word for it.

Or better yet...here, - paste this into the Babelfish, and see if you can't connect some dotty dots:

"In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center."

Just so you know... that's written in plain English - so it should translate well.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm

[Pardalis]

Even if English is not my mother tongue, I think I can read English pretty well:

The exercises differed from the Sept. 11 attacks in one important respect: The planes in the simulation were coming from a foreign country.

Until Sept. 11, NORAD was expected to defend the United States and Canada from aircraft based elsewhere. After the attacks, that responsibility broadened to include flights that originated in the two countries.

[JimBenArm]

I apologize...I only have articles written in English... since that's obviously not your first language... I guess you'll just have to take my word for it.

Or better yet...here, - paste this into the Babelfish, and see if you can't connect some dotty dots:

"In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center."

Just so you know... that's written in plain English - so it should translate well.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm


Thought I'd put in the part you like to ignore:


The exercises differed from the Sept. 11 attacks in one important respect: The planes in the simulation were coming from a foreign country.
Until Sept. 11, NORAD was expected to defend the United States and Canada from aircraft based elsewhere. After the attacks, that responsibility broadened to include flights that originated in the two countries.


Bolding mine.

28thK - "Ready, Fire, Aim. Ow, my foot!"

[Perforatu]

I apologize...I only have articles written in English... since that's obviously not your first language...
It is, actually. What, you thought English was only spoken inside the U.S.?

Or better yet...here, - paste this into the Babelfish, and see if you can't connect some dotty dots:

"In the two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, the North American Aerospace Defense Command conducted exercises simulating what the White House says was unimaginable at the time: hijacked airliners used as weapons to crash into targets and cause mass casualties. One of the imagined targets was the World Trade Center."
Yeah, there's that quote again... But it doesn't say anything about regular exercises, which is what you claimed. The article you linked to goes on to explain that the exercise scenarios always involved foreign planes, which means all the exercises in the world didn't prepare them for what transpired on 9-11.

In light of this, I just have to ask... Is English your first language?

[JimBenArm]

In light of this, I just have to ask... Is English your first language?

A lot of us wonder about that.

[jaydeehess]

The exercises differed from the Sept. 11 attacks in one important respect: The planes in the simulation were coming from a foreign country.

Until Sept. 11, NORAD was expected to defend the United States and Canada from aircraft based elsewhere. After the attacks, that responsibility broadened to include flights that originated in the two countries.


Like so many CTists, 28th has a very selective quote mining ability. Ironicomically he just claimed someone took his own statement out of context and here he is , exposed as doing that exact 'crime'.

[28th Kingdom]

Even if English is not my mother tongue, I think I can read English pretty well:

"But there were exceptions in the early drills, including one operation, planned in July 2001 and conducted later, that involved planes from airports in Utah and Washington state that were "hijacked." Those planes were escorted by U.S. and Canadian aircraft to airfields in British Columbia and Alaska."

"We have planned and executed numerous scenarios over the years to include aircraft originating from foreign airports penetrating our sovereign airspace," Gen. Ralph Eberhart, NORAD commander, told USA TODAY. "Regrettably, the tragic events of 9/11 were never anticipated or exercised."

A hijacked airliner being used as a weapon is flying in US sovereign airspace. It doesn't matter if it came from the outside or inside - NORAD was to defend against it while it was in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE.

On 9/11 there were 4 hijacked airliners flying in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE, and NORAD would have shot them little bitches down if they weren't distracted by phantom hijackings and war games - that clouded the days events.

No, these games didn't delay response times by only 30 seconds. They all but disarmed NORAD. We really don't know what hit the Pentagon, but if it was a missile than there were only three airliners - and one was shot down by NORAD... so they still got 1/3 of their targets, even though they were handcuffed by those demons.

Mossad agents probably did most of the dirty work surrounding 9/11 including planting the explosives. Not a single member of the US military had to know about or participate in 9/11. There were only 4 weapons used on 9/11, which means that at a max - it would have only taken 4 people to execute the actual attacks, or zero if they were drone planes.

Israeli agents could have carried out the entire thing... if it weren't for NORAD. That's why the USG had to be partially involved. Really... in one way - the USG only had to disarm NORAD, and the Mossad could have taken care of the rest.

http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=10364

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

[jaydeehess]

A hijacked airliner being used as a weapon is flying in US sovereign airspace. It doesn't matter if it came from the outside or inside - NORAD was to defend against it while it was in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE.

yes it does you icredible dolt.

The identification of those planes as hijacked was supposed to have occured while they were still incoming towards the USA


AND


just how do you suppose that a hijacked plane gets escorted to feilds in B.C. and Alaska? They would include negotiation that had the pilots of the hijacked a/c follow the escorts. The pilots of the 9/11 planes were the hijackers themselves and they had no intention of negotiating anything at all!!

[defaultdotxbe]

"We have planned and executed numerous scenarios over the years to include aircraft originating from foreign airports penetrating our sovereign airspace," Gen. Ralph Eberhart, NORAD commander, told USA TODAY. "Regrettably, the tragic events of 9/11 were never anticipated or exercised."


you bolded the wrong part there buddy, i fixed it for you

A hijacked airliner being used as a weapon is flying in US sovereign airspace. It doesn't matter if it came from the outside or inside - NORAD was to defend against it while it was in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE.

norad looked out, not in, even if a hijacked plane did make it into US airspace they would have been watching it because it was comign from outside

imagine someone guarding the gate at a military base, how many people could another soldier kill inside the base and the guard would never know because hes lookign for someone outside tryign to get in?

On 9/11 there were 4 hijacked airliners flying in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE, and NORAD would have shot them little bitches down if they weren't distracted by phantom hijackings and war games - that clouded the days events.
can you provide evidence the excercises distracted anyone for more than a few seconds? the excercises never even started becuase the first plane was hijakced an hour before the excercises were sceduled to begin

and to this day, no one has been able to name an excercise that involved a hijacking

No, these games didn't delay response times by only 30 seconds. They all but disarmed NORAD. We really don't know what hit the Pentagon, but if it was a missile than there were only three airliners - and one was shot down by NORAD... so they still got 1/3 of their targets, even though they were handcuffed by those demons.
so who shot down 93? NORAD isnt a pilots name, who was in the area? why would the government lie about this? why would NORAD lie abou thtis? why woudl the pilot not come forward?

[jaydeehess]

Mossad agents probably did most of the dirty work surrounding 9/11 including planting the explosives. Not a single member of the US military had to know about or participate in 9/11. There were only 4 weapons used on 9/11, which means that at a max - it would have only taken 4 people to execute the actual attacks, or zero if they were drone planes.

Israeli agents could have carried out the entire thing... if it weren't for NORAD. That's why the USG had to be partially involved. Really... in one way - the USG only had to disarm NORAD, and the Mossad could have taken care of the rest

Internal contradiction - only 4 people, but also some in the USG and NORAD



(and perhaps Larry Silverstein, and the Secret Service and Rumsfeld, and the people who set up and launched missiles and those who coerced others to keep quiet about what they saw, and ,,, and ,,, and,,,)

[28th Kingdom]

Here's the new rule... everyone wants to claim that everyone is cherry picking and avoiding points.

Well, since I'm the only one proactively presenting theories and evidence - if you want me to reply to you, than you need to address everything in my post. You can't cherry-pick one line and expect me to reply.

I will reply to anyone who actually refutes all of my claims by linking to articles and/or some other form of evidence that attempts to debunk what I have said.

There... I should have laid those ground rules down a long time ago... now we'll see whose doing the cherry-picking... and whose avoiding the real issues.

[28th Kingdom]

Internal contradiction - only 4 people, but also some in the USG and NORAD



(and perhaps Larry Silverstein, and the Secret Service and Rumsfeld, and the people who set up and launched missiles and those who coerced others to keep quiet about what they saw, and ,,, and ,,, and,,,)

Are you Beachnut's cousin?

[T.A.M.]

"But there were exceptions in the early drills, including one operation, planned in July 2001 and conducted later, that involved planes from airports in Utah and Washington state that were "hijacked." Those planes were escorted by U.S. and Canadian aircraft to airfields in British Columbia and Alaska."

"We have planned and executed numerous scenarios over the years to include aircraft originating from foreign airports penetrating our sovereign airspace," Gen. Ralph Eberhart, NORAD commander, told USA TODAY. "Regrettably, the tragic events of 9/11 were never anticipated or exercised."

A hijacked airliner being used as a weapon is flying in US sovereign airspace. It doesn't matter if it came from the outside or inside - NORAD was to defend against it while it was in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE.

On 9/11 there were 4 hijacked airliners flying in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE, and NORAD would have shot them little bitches down if they weren't distracted by phantom hijackings and war games - that clouded the days events.

No, these games didn't delay response times by only 30 seconds. They all but disarmed NORAD. We really don't know what hit the Pentagon, but if it was a missile than there were only three airliners - and one was shot down by NORAD... so they still got 1/3 of their targets, even though they were handcuffed by those demons.

Mossad agents probably did most of the dirty work surrounding 9/11 including planting the explosives. Not a single member of the US military had to know about or participate in 9/11. There were only 4 weapons used on 9/11, which means that at a max - it would have only taken 4 people to execute the actual attacks, or zero if they were drone planes.

Israeli agents could have carried out the entire thing... if it weren't for NORAD. That's why the USG had to be partially involved. Really... in one way - the USG only had to disarm NORAD, and the Mossad could have taken care of the rest.

http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=10364

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

You know what, I have had about enough of you, you arrogant obnoxious A**HOLE.

Cavemen? How many cavemen get college degrees? How many cavemen, like KSM, are trained in post graduate studies? Osama has multiple degrees. Cavemen in caves. Seems given he had an allowance of $1 Million per year that he likely stayed in places a little better than caves.

You aren't defending squat. You accuse your own government and military of treason and of murder. You have no evidence to back it up. The only difference between the numerous plane hijackings that occured successfully prior to 9/11, and those of that day, is that they took over the cockpits and flew the planes into selected targets. So what your saying is "cavemen" could easily hijack planes, and have dones so in the past, but no way could they fly said planes into buildings.

You sit there on your high horse and accuse hundreds of engineers and scientists of complicity in murder. You accuse military, NORAD, FAA, FEMA, NIST, FBI, CIA, and those who work for them of aiding and abetting murderers.

I say someone should drag your sorry ass into court and sue you for libel and slander, defamation of character, and as many more crimes as they can pin you with you poor excuse for a human.

You have turned from your original disguise of a "person just asking questions" to your true coat of "paranoid mean mouthed, obnoxious lunatic".

I use to try and tell people here to be civil and go easy on you, and for the most part I will myself continue to do so, as it is the way, most of the time, I like to do things, but I am done standing up for your rights on this forum. I hope some of the posters here tear you a verbal "new one".

TAM:mad: :mad:

[jaydeehess]

Here's the new rule... everyone wants to claim that everyone is cherry picking and avoiding points.

Well, since I'm the only one proactively presenting theories and evidence - if you want me to reply to you, than you need to address everything in my post. You can't cherry-pick one line and expect me to reply.

I will reply to anyone who actually refutes all of my claims by linking to articles and/or some other form of evidence that attempts to debunk what I have said.

There... I should have laid those ground rules down a long time ago... now we'll see whose doing the cherry-picking... and whose avoiding the real issues.

The first time in this thread that YOU brought 'cherry-picking' up the poster you accused was indeed quoting your statement in its entirety.

You were shown to be 'cherry-picking' the usatoday article and the refutation of your claim came from the very article you used.

But, ok, have it your way. You do realize that this also would apply to you?

[jaydeehess]

Are you Beachnut's cousin?

all my cousins reside in Canada.

Beachnut, are you Canadian? If so then there is an approx 10 in 30 million chance that he/she is my cousin.

[ConspiRaider]

Mossad agents probably did most of the dirty work surrounding 9/11 including planting the explosives. Not a single member of the US military had to know about or participate in 9/11. There were only 4 weapons used on 9/11, which means that at a max - it would have only taken 4 people to execute the actual attacks, or zero if they were drone planes. (emphasis mine CR)

Israeli agents could have carried out the entire thing... if it weren't for NORAD. That's why the USG had to be partially involved. Really... in one way - the USG only had to disarm NORAD, and the Mossad could have taken care of the rest.

Insensitive Person:

To eliminate the shame you brought upon yourself by implying "drone planes", you will now conduct live interviews with:

-- Any member of the forensics team who identified the airline victims from Flight 77 and Flight 93

-- Robert Shaler (he is at Penn State University), who headed up the team that identified more than 1600 victims in the WTC complex rubble. It took more than 3 years. Technology had to be invented to deal with the enormity and complexity of this terrible, grisly job. Some of the passengers from Flight 11 and Flight 175 were ID'd. Three of the hijackers were ID'd.

You will first tell them that they are liars, and then truthfully report their reactions.

You will then shut your mouth and listen to them as they describe the realities of performing this horrific duty. It's something no one wants to do - or even think about. Yet these extraordinary people got up every day and gave it their all.

You are a thoroughly disgusting individual. Before you can be thought of otherwise, you will get off your ass, talk to these people, publish your account, and then beg forgiveness.

[defaultdotxbe]

Insensitive Person:

To eliminate the shame you brought upon yourself by implying "drone planes", you will now conduct live interviews with:

-- Any member of the forensics team who identified the airline victims from Flight 77 and Flight 93

-- Robert Shaler (he is at Penn State University), who headed up the team that identified more than 1600 victims in the WTC complex rubble. It took more than 3 years. Technology had to be invented to deal with the enormity and complexity of this terrible, grisly job. Some of the passengers from Flight 11 and Flight 175 were ID'd. Three of the hijackers were ID'd.

You will first tell them that they are liars, and then truthfully report their reactions.

You will then shut your mouth and listen to them as they describe the realities of performing this horrific duty. It's something no one wants to do - or even think about. Yet these extraordinary people got up every day and gave it their all.

You are a thoroughly disgusting individual. Before you can be thought of otherwise, you will get off your ass, talk to these people, publish your account, and then beg forgiveness.
dont forget wally miller, who spent a month on his hands and knees collecting remains in shanksville

of course i think hes thoroughly sick of CTers

[Firestone]

:words:

Mossad agents probably did most of the dirty work surrounding 9/11 including planting the explosives.

:words:

Israeli agents could have carried out the entire thing... if it weren't for NORAD. That's why the USG had to be partially involved. Really... in one way - the USG only had to disarm NORAD, and the Mossad could have taken care of the rest.
Please provide evidence for these accusations or retract them.

[beachnut]

all my cousins reside in Canada.

Beachnut, are you Canadian? If so then there is an approx 10 in 30 million chance that he/she is my cousin.

Do I have to read 28th post to figure out why he thinks we are cousins?

My grandkids could be related; my father in-law has some French Canadian stuff; are they strong and level headed?

[Big Les]

I must have missed it. Was he a part of the winning Red Tomato team on Ready Steady Cook?

Wot's 'ee liiiiiiiike, eh?!

[Big Les]

Let's simplify.

Penetrating sovereign airspace, 28th. Pen-e-trating. As in, coming in from the outside? Get it?

[JimBenArm]

There... I should have laid those ground rules down a long time ago... now we'll see whose doing the cherry-picking... and whose avoiding the real issues.

Now he's a mod as well. All hail the mighty 28th!

What a waste of perfectly good protoplasm this one is!

[Perforatu]

Here's the new rule... everyone wants to claim that everyone is cherry picking and avoiding points.

Well, since I'm the only one proactively presenting theories and evidence - if you want me to reply to you, than you need to address everything in my post. You can't cherry-pick one line and expect me to reply.

I will reply to anyone who actually refutes all of my claims by linking to articles and/or some other form of evidence that attempts to debunk what I have said.

There... I should have laid those ground rules down a long time ago... now we'll see whose doing the cherry-picking... and whose avoiding the real issues.
I notice you were perfectly happy to provide evidence for the quote I "cherry picked" from your post - in fact, you were rather condescending about it. Now that multiple posters have pointed out to you that the USA Today article does little to substantiate your claim, you suddenly object.

But alright - to rectify any supposed "cherry picking", please tell me which additional statements in post #60 (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2216839#post2216839) I've ignored that would alter the meaning of the claim I requested a source for, namely:

and that this defense knew hijacking airliners and turning them into weapons was a possibility... so much so that they conducted regular exercises simulating such attacks... including ones on the WTC.
Alternatively, please admit that this claim has been debunked.

[~enigma~]

Is English your first language?Isn't it obvious his first language is dumb?

[jaydeehess]

Do I have to read 28th post to figure out why he thinks we are cousins?

My grandkids could be related; my father in-law has some French Canadian stuff; are they strong and level headed?

I don't know why, from his inquiry post, why he wonders if we are cousins. I used the term, "internal contradiction'. Is that significant somehow?

No French in my background. Mine is Scottish.(well, and Serbian. How's that for a mix!) Scots certainly are strong and intelligent though have been known to get a little hot under the collar, especially since those of this background are not known to suffer fools glady.

[DarkMagician]

I don't know why, from his inquiry post, why he wonders if we are cousins. I used the term, "internal contradiction'. Is that significant somehow?No, he's just got the attention span of a gnat, coupled with the inability to use PMs.

[Architect]

Here's the new rule... everyone wants to claim that everyone is cherry picking and avoiding points.


This is rich from the guy with everyone who asks an akward question on ignore, eh?

[beachnut]

9/11 there were 4 hijacked airliners flying in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE, and NORAD would have shot them little bitches down if they weren't distracted by phantom hijackings and war games - that clouded the days events.

Mossad agents probably did most of the dirty work surrounding 9/11 including planting the explosives. Not a single member of the US military had to know about or participate in 9/11. There were only 4 weapons used on 9/11, which means that at a max - it would have only taken 4 people to execute the actual attacks, or zero if they were drone planes.

Israeli agents could have carried out the entire thing... if it weren't for NORAD. That's why the USG had to be partially involved. Really... in one way - the USG only had to disarm NORAD, and the Mossad could have taken care of the rest.

http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=10364

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

So you blame the Jews and run away like a terrorist when I say boo!

Bye; I think you are gone to look for more lies! Go to your Islamic handlers and get some more junk!

[westprog]

Wait a minute... let me reframe this even more for you... To all of the current and retired military personal on here - who believe that 19 amateurs with primitive weaponry outsmarted your own multi-billion dollar defense system - whose side are you on, anyway? Are you defending these 19 men? Are you saying, yes... they are smarter than the US military? They are so clever... that they can invent an indefensible way of attacking the headquarters of the military for which you are a part of?

So, what are you saying about yourselves then? Really now... what does it say about you all who bad mouth your leaders by calling them incompetent - and who would rather believe that 19 amateurs with no professional military experience can out maneuver your world-class defense - than to think that a handful of corrupt men at the top of this system - handcuffed your military so that they couldn't stop these attacks from happening?

You would rather degrade the men and women of your armed services by saying they are incapable of defending against even the most amateur of attacks, than to believe that your government has been hijacked by a group of ruthless outlaws who are hellbent on running this country into the ground.



This is actually key to CT-think. When it became clear that a bunch of ordinary arabs were able to do such horrendous damage, the floor fell out of the world for a lot of people. It had to be impossible. It's actually more reassuring to have the US government being behind it than to realise that there a millions of people out there who hate America, who are willing to die to hurt America, and who can't be stopped. So it must be impossible.

As with most CT thinking, there is no explanation of why it is impossible for determined armed men to take over a plane full of unarmed civilians. It has to be impossible. Common f******sense. Otherwise it's a very scary, unpredictable world.

What's really unbelievable is the idea that an Arab might be smart and capable. They live in caves, don't they? They can't read or write or use the internet or cellphones. They can't plan or scheme. And they can't even be as evil as us.

[JanH]

Let me see if I understand this. 28K claims that it is "degrading" to the US armed forces to imply that they failed to protect the US on 9-11-01. It is, however, fine to accuse it of participating in and covering up mass murder.

[Architect]

Aha lads,

The posting site is getting interesting. The mod has "washed his hands" of akward comments. Meanwhile they reckon that we're inflitrating them:

You did a good job by helping to reveal the infiltrators on highest levels.

I assume, you disagree with this infiltration facts, but thanks for giving us the opportunity and space
of doing so.

Here are the latest updates:

Waiting for Answers from One World Government Cultist David Ray Griffin
http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2467 (http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2467)

Floum/Jones st911DomainGate: Ex-U.S. GOV Fred Burks climbs in '9/11 Truth' Infiltration League
http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2463 (http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2463)

Ningen(Blog): The LIHOP Negligence setup of David Kubiak
http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2482 (http://www.bloglines.com/blog/ewing2001?id=2482)

ConstantineBlog: WHO DIRECTS THE INFILTRATION OF THE 9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT?
http://www.bloglines.com/preview?siteid=6120684&itemid=2476 (http://www.bloglines.com/preview?siteid=6120684&itemid=2476)

nico haupt aka ewing2001
911bloglines.com 911researchers.com

[babazaroni]

A hijacked airliner being used as a weapon is flying in US sovereign airspace. It doesn't matter if it came from the outside or inside - NORAD was to defend against it while it was in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE.

On 9/11 there were 4 hijacked airliners flying in US SOVEREIGN AIRSPACE, and NORAD would have shot them little bitches down if they weren't distracted by phantom hijackings and war games - that clouded the days events.


Look into the Payne Stewart jet incident. It took 26 minutes after contact was lost for the FAA to even ask two training F-16's to look for the jet. They tried to find the jet but had to abort for fuel reasons. It took 85 minutes after contact was lost before a military plane located the jet.

[T.A.M.]

Here is an "interesting" tidbit courtesy of Kevin Barrett, based on a lecture given by our favorite head priest, Mr. D.R. Griffin. Via the paragraph below, and the points within, Mr. Griffin claims that he can say without any doubt that the collapse of all three WTC towers was via controlled Demolition...

Full article here:

http://www.phillyimc.org/en/2005/10/16883.shtml


"Dr. Griffin listed ten characteristics of the collapses which all indicate that the buildings did not fall due to being struck by planes or the ensuing fires. He explained the buildings fell suddenly without any indication of collapse. They fell straight into their own footprint at free-fall speed, meeting virtually no resistance as they fell--a physical impossibility unless all vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing the core columns. The towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds, and nothing about the plane crashes or ensuing fires gave any indication of causing the kind of damage that would be necessary to trigger even a partial or progressive collapse, much less the shredding of the buildings into dust and fragments that could drop at free-fall speed. The massive core columns--the most significant structural feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the official 9/11 Commission Report--were severed into uniform 30 foot sections, just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly before a real investigation could transpire. There was a volcanic-like dust cloud from the concrete being pulverized, and no physical mechanism other than explosives can begin to explain how so much of the buildings' concrete was rendered into extremely fine dust. The debris was ejected horizontally several hundred feet in huge fan shaped plumes stretching in all directions, with telltale "squibs" following the path of the explosives downward. These are all facts that have been avoided by mainstream and even most of the alternative media. Again, these are characteristics of the kind of controlled demolitions that news people and firefighters were describing on the morning of 9/11. Those multiple first-person descriptions of controlled demolition were hidden away for almost four years by the City of New York until a lawsuit finally forced the city to release them. Dr. Griffin's study of these accounts has led him beyond his earlier questioning of the official story of the collapses, to his above-quoted conclusion: The destruction of the three WTC buildings with explosives by US government terrorists is no longer a hypothesis, but a fact that has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt."

Ok, so where to begin...


the buildings fell suddenly without any indication of collapse

ummm...so the inward bending/buckling of the outer steel columns, as seen in video and photographic evidence...that wasnt warning? What did you expect, someone atop the building with a bull horn?


They fell straight into their own footprint at free-fall speed, meeting virtually no resistance as they fell--a physical impossibility unless all vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing the core columns.

Unless they were tip to one side and fall over, where else would they have fallen, but into their own footprint? Once again, the incorrect use of the term "speed" when referring to an object falling under acceleration due to gravity. Finally, do I have to go into the insaneness of a theologian commenting on the "Physical impossibility" of the "near free fall" of the towers, without any proof as to why it could not have occured so.


The towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds, and nothing about the plane crashes or ensuing fires gave any indication of causing the kind of damage that would be necessary to trigger even a partial or progressive collapse, much less the shredding of the buildings into dust and fragments that could drop at free-fall speed.

Once again, comment without the slightest proof. Fact Boeing 707 at "in the fog" speed into building does not equal 767 at 500mph +. Beyond that, I wish if he was gonna make comments like this, he could back them up, or at least point us to some science that does. Finally, I don't recall seeing the entire buildings "shredded into dust". There was a lot of dust, yes, but there was a lot of solid debris as well.


The massive core columns--the most significant structural feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the official 9/11 Commission Report--were severed into uniform 30 foot sections, just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly before a real investigation could transpire.

Well for starters, the stench of insinuation in the comments is nauseating, but beyond that, I am 100% positive that there were many pieces of the steel columns that were smaller, and many larger, than 30 feet in length...what a stupid, silly comment.


There was a volcanic-like dust cloud from the concrete being pulverized, and no physical mechanism other than explosives can begin to explain how so much of the buildings' concrete was rendered into extremely fine dust.

1. Drywall was likely the main component of the dust.
2. While a fair bit of the concrete was pulverized, there was a lot of macroscopic concrete, and many large pieces.
3. No Proof, once again, that this could not have been caused by the collapse of the building itself, regardless of what initiated collapse. I dare the truthers to find one case where a 110 storey building, prior to 9/11, completely collapsed without the aid of explosives, and did NOT have the majority of its concrete turned into dust...waiting...waiting....


he debris was ejected horizontally several hundred feet in huge fan shaped plumes stretching in all directions, with telltale "squibs" following the path of the explosives downward.

This stuff gets so old, yet this guy is one of the most prominent in his movement. I mean really. the squib thing...ok

The "squib" like ejections from the windows below the impacts, none of which took place prior to collapse, as should be the case if they were Demolition Squibs, were merely ejection of air and debris as a result of the increase in pressure caused by the collapse itself...End of Story.

So, I can say, without any doubt, that there is NO PROOF, in any way shape or form, that any of the WTC Towers were brought down by controlled demolition.

TAM:)

[Architect]

The massive core columns--the most significant structural feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the official 9/11 Commission Report--were severed into uniform 30 foot sections, just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly before a real investigation could transpire.


How dumb would they have to be to make CT so obvious? :)

Option1: The steel came in 30ft sections originally, and tended to fail at the joints.

Option2: They cut it into 30ft sections on-site BECAUSE it would fit onto the trucks.

CTers: never investigate the most obvious solutions to any problem....

[ktesibios]

How dumb would they have to be to make CT so obvious? :)

Option1: The steel came in 30ft sections originally, and tended to fail at the joints.

Option2: They cut it into 30ft sections on-site BECAUSE it would fit onto the trucks.

CTers: never investigate the most obvious solutions to any problem....

Regarding option 1- if 30 foot sections fit nicely onto trucks for removal during the Ground Zero cleanup, is it possible that making the columns in 30 foot sections meant that they would fit nicely onto trucks delivering them to the construction site?

[JamesB]

I submitted a question, but I somehow doubt he will answer mine. Well honestly at least. I just hope I don't get left out of his new book.

[JamesB]

Well it is a week past the deadline, and he hasn't answered a single question. And here I thought these guys were all about asking questions.

[Architect]

Funnily enough, I had exactly the same thought earlier today and had a wee look at the page.....no response yet!

[jaydeehess]

Weren't we supposed to get e-mails when the questions were answered?

Why do I get the distinct feeling that DRG is only going to answer 'select' questions? Maybe I'm just paranoid:)

I've been going back to the forum and posting here (http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/how-hot-did-the-jet-fuel-heat-the-world-trade-center-t189.0.html;msg634)

[Architect]

Yeah, there does seem to be an ominous ongoing silence!

I think we should take it as a compliment. But it might just be that DRG is a busy man.

[MikeW]

Yeah, there does seem to be an ominous ongoing silence!

I think we should take it as a compliment. But it might just be that DRG is a busy man.
Well, he does have his "Debunking the Debunkers" book to write. So perhaps his lack of spare time is partly down to us.

[Firestone]

I'm afraid our mean questions have crashed the RINF forum (http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.0.html). :(

Now we'll never know ...

[~enigma~]

I'm afraid our mean questions have crashed the RINF forum (http://www.rinf.com/forum/911-truth-forums/david-ray-griffin-answers-your-questions-t63.0.html). :(

Now we'll never know ...

I wonder why this doesn't surprise me.