Jack White Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 NIST lists fires in Building 7 "inferno". Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 The falacy of the govt "pancake theory". Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 This is the strangest of all the oddities. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 This one is really strange...aluminum vs steel...and aluminum wins.Jack That is a strange one Jack! If that video is real that plane was one 'tough old plane!' It was a day when the usual laws of physics, logic, cause and effect were all on holiday! In fact it is hard to find too many things that happened as one would 'expect' - given the events. [sort of like Dallas or the RFK assassination or many another 'magic-show-jobs']. I do fear, however, that a few of the strange pieces of evidence have been planted by the very people behind the event to cast doubt and allow ridicule of those who would question the official account - just as they did with Dallas - endlessly throwing in new suspects and spurious theories and information - making it seem as if it were coming from serious researchers or from real evidence, when it often was not. The superficiality of the 'investigation' is shown in that many/most of these anomalies you bring up [and they are others - even ones presented in written form to the Commission] that were not even addressed. Same patterns as before. There are two schools of thought. There are those, who even though they have repeatedly been lied and hoodwinked by power/government/investigations/etc. before, will always believe their next pronouncment - and there are those who have learned not to trust; but verify and prove from one's own examination of the facts. Those who implicitly give their officials and oligarchy the benefit of the doubt [or unerring support]; and those who question what any official says - especially in situations like this. Ever was thus and sadly, seem ever will be. Independant thinking is a rare commodity these days...and not appreciated by many. Patterns not learned; dots not connected and past history ignored by all too many IMO. Possible, Peter...but UNLESS THOUSANDS OF AMATEUR PHOTOS WERE FAKED, there are many things that do not fit conventional thinking. My first posting showed a MELTED MAIL TRUCK in the absence of debris or fire. There is a melted bus nearby. These things are shown in numerous photos hard to fake and coordinate, unlike the JFK case when the few photos were controlled. I tend to think most of the WTC photos are genuine...but most of the Pentagon photos were fabricated and/or altered. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 At this time, with 8 votes cast, the results are: 37.5% - All lies (3 votes) 25% - Mostly lies (2 votes) 12.5% - Believe most of it, but have doubts (1 vote) 25% - Overall believe (2 votes) With 8 people responding, most do not believe anything about the report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 At this time, with 8 votes cast, the results are:37.5% - All lies (3 votes) 25% - Mostly lies (2 votes) 12.5% - Believe most of it, but have doubts (1 vote) 25% - Overall believe (2 votes) With 8 people responding, most do not believe anything about the report. Or are afraid that all actions and posts on the internet are no longer private..... If that is the case, then I'd advise them to stay inside and never interact with the outside world, never go outside again. It's an opinion - nothing more, nothing less. People should stand up and make theirs known. Besides, the vote so far is ANTI-government, not pro. People who do not agree with the report are speaking up, it would seem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 This one is really strange...aluminum vs steel...and aluminum wins.Jack I thought we had dealt with that nonsense already? perhaps it was on a different forum. I'll check... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Nope, I was right; it was discussed a couple of months ago. As is to be expected, Jack simply recycles old claims that have already been proven wrong (or doubtful). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Nope, I was right; it was discussed a couple of months ago.As is to be expected, Jack simply recycles old claims that have already been proven wrong (or doubtful). Please go through the oddities in this thread and demonstrate every "recycled old claim" that "HAS BEEN PROVEN WRONG OR DOUBTFUL". None has been "proved wrong". Only one was presented previously, and it was in a changed format. There is nothing wrong with repetition of valid evidence. There are new members of the forum who did not see things presented months or years ago. As is to be expected, Burton never presents research...only "debunking". Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Nope, I was right; it was discussed a couple of months ago.As is to be expected, Jack simply recycles old claims that have already been proven wrong (or doubtful). Please go through the oddities in this thread and demonstrate every "recycled old claim" that "HAS BEEN PROVEN WRONG OR DOUBTFUL". None has been "proved wrong". Only one was presented previously, and it was in a changed format. There is nothing wrong with repetition of valid evidence. There are new members of the forum who did not see things presented months or years ago. As is to be expected, Burton never presents research...only "debunking". Jack The problem is Jack is that you will not admit your work is wrong even when faced with unimpeachable empirical evidence. Instead you let the false claims stand only to recycle them again and again. In my eyes that is not an intellectually honest way of doing things. One prime example: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry116938 Burton has provided far more research that you can ever imagine producing. Evan actually does RESEARCH, instead of making wild and unfounded claims and calling it "research" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 (edited) Lemkin sez: "The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies." - A. Shickelgruber Did you recite this quote as you were looking in the mirror, is it based on your own personal experience or perhap the reason you believe the drool you post claiming to be evidence? Inquiring ( and open and honest) minds really want to know..... Edited July 19, 2008 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Craig, I consider that last post to be a personal attack and have made it invisible. I'll alert other mods and see if they agree. Please do NOT make such posts - address the issues raised, please. First and only warning. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Craig,I consider that last post to be a personal attack and have made it invisible. I'll alert other mods and see if they agree. Please do NOT make such posts - address the issues raised, please. First and only warning. Thank you. I DID address the issue as posted by Lemkin. Did his post not suggest that those who did not believe the TRUTHER claims had simple minds? In my mind at least, given this warning, Lemkins post borders on a personal insult not only to you, where it was aimed, but at anyone not conforming to Lemkins world view. I'll gladly abide by the mods ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Mauro Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 (edited) Poll questions added. *************************************************** Where do we cast our vote? O.K. I found it. Edited July 19, 2008 by Terry Mauro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 20, 2008 Share Posted July 20, 2008 As is to be expected, Burton never presents research...only "debunking".Jack If correcting inaccurate material is my only contribution, then I am satisfied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now