Not another 911 thread

TalkieWalkie

King Mob wrote: »

And yet you think a passport is also impossible in their version and much much less convincing.
So why didn't they make one?

Make one what ? Whatever it is, I'm sure you could think of a good reason. Just pretend to be a CT'r for a minute

King Mob wrote: »

The found many many personal effects.
A list was provided to you, you promptly ignored it becasue it's not in line with your dogma.

Sorry, "I aint wasting my precious time and bandwidth" on lists

IrelandSpirit

King Mob wrote: »

Well considering that planting one would imply a vast global conspiracy that makes less and less sense the more you look into it.....

You are making no sense. Planting one would imply a vast global conspiracy of Islamic terrorists, which is precicely what they wanted it to look like.

That is a nonsensical arguement. Good thing it's not the one I'm making.

Actually you are the one making it. I don't believe in fire-proof bomb-proof passports. Seriously, I don't.

Yea, why would you have to make sense of you position or ask questions when you can just accept what CT sites tell you.

Hahaha, it was coming from a site debunking the no planes CT.

King Mob

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Make one what ? Whatever it is, I'm sure you could think of a good reason. Just pretend to be a CT'r for a minute

So basically start with a conclusion and make **** up until I have the theory I want?

Unfortunately I care about reality so....

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

Sorry, "I aint wasting my precious time and bandwidth" on lists

Again why am I surprised that you can't discuss things like an adult...?

King Mob

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

You are making no sense. Planting one would imply a vast global conspiracy of Islamic terrorists, which is precicely what they wanted it to look like.

Actually you are the one making it. I don't believe in fire-proof bomb-proof passports. Seriously, I don't.

Hahaha, it was coming from a site debunking the no planes CT.

So am I wasting my time asking you to try and flesh out your idea with details and or facts or would you prefer to stick to childish tactics?

IrelandSpirit

King Mob wrote: »

So am I wasting my time asking you to try and flesh out your idea with details and or facts or would you prefer to stick to childish tactics?

What childish tactics? No childish tactics coming from me, and no, I am not gonna waste my time trying to debunk your fire-bomb proof passport CT theory! It is insane, sorry, it really is.

King Mob

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

What childish tactics? No childish tactics coming from me, and no, I am not gonna waste my time trying to debunk your fire-bomb proof passport CT theory! It is insane, sorry, it really is.

So that's a yes on the childish tactics then?

And you wonder why no one takes conspiracy theories seriously....

IrelandSpirit

King Mob wrote: »

So that's a yes on the childish tactics then?

And you wonder why no one takes conspiracy theories seriously....

I think that's a yes on your childish tactics, and crack-pot conspiracy theories about terrorist fire-bomb proof passports, yes. Conclusively.

Now, move on ...

... did you actually watch any of the september clues vids, and/or any stuff debunking it? or you just here to cause headache ... I do have headache.

alastair

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

I think that's a yes on your childish tactics, and crack-pot conspiracy theories about terrorist fire-bomb proof passports, yes. Conclusively.

Do you really have difficulty with distinguishing the notion of 'fire-bomb proof passports' from the act of an object being thrown clear of an explosion/fire? I doubt it - so childish tactics are all that remain.

Is this plastic life vest 'fire-bomb proof' or simply thrown clear of the fire? What do you reckon?

"...I noticed in the courtyard that there were valises, suitcases, strewn about the courtyard. There were wallets everywhere, broken glass, and then I noticed that there were airplane tickets." FDNY firefighter John Moribito

FDNY EMT Briam Smith: "So we went up to the 10-10 house...I remember there was life jackets everywhere, the yellow in-flight life jackets, and that the contrast of the yellow against all the gray, you know. It stood out."

alastair

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Hahaha, it was coming from a site debunking the no planes CT.

No odds, it was another CT site. So yep - 'why would you have to make sense of your position or ask questions when you can just accept what CT sites tell you.' is a pretty valid question.

TalkieWalkie

Hi al, welcome back
And most of the crappy evidence you came up with comes from biased sites run by folk who want you to believe what you believe. Your very easily influenced.

bytey

meglome wrote: »

Now I didn't read the entire piece but all the 911 attackers had training. They didn't need to take-off or land, which I'm taking are the most difficult things to do. Mythbusters did an episode where they were able to land a jet in a simulator without any training, by being talked down over the radio.

see thats where you fail, you didnt read the piece yet put your own assumptions on it

and mythbusters is known BS , I cant believe you mention them.

TalkieWalkie

We can't use youtube as evidence, but we can use "MYTHBUSTERS" lmao

Di0genes

bytey wrote: »

and mythbusters is known BS ,

It is? Really?

TalkieWalkie

meglome wrote: »

Now I didn't read the entire piece but all the 911 attackers had training. They didn't need to take-off or land, which I'm taking are the most difficult things to do. Mythbusters did an episode where they were able to land a jet in a simulator without any training, by being talked down over the radio.

Is this the clip where he landed a Jet ? Making up more fairy tales again :rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ8K-hOcRHk

Brown Bomber

Can anyone explain why they were even carrying their passports?

They were all on internal flights

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Can anyone explain why they were even carrying their passports?

They were all on internal flights

You are required to carry a form of photo ID. The most common photo ID for non US nationals is their passport.

Duiske

Di0genes wrote: »

You are required to carry a form of photo ID. The most common photo ID for non US nationals is their passport.

Believe it or not, its not actually required to have ANY ID for internal US flights, let alone photo ID, but it causes security hassles if you turn up for a flight with neither.

Just had a look at valid forms of id that can be used for internal US flights.

* Driver Education Card
* Passport
* Social Security Card
* Birth Certificate
* Military ID Card
* Military Dependent ID Card
* Divorce Papers
* Certificate of Marriage
* Baptismal Records
* Court Order
* School Records/Transcript (certified)
* Unemployment Card
* Adoption Papers
* Concealed Weapons Permit :eek:

Sorry, forgot link to info.

http://www.ifly.com/airport-identification

* Don’t have a valid form of ID?

Well you can still get through security, but you will be subject to a manual check, meaning you will be placed in a separate line so security can perform a more detailed screening, which could include a search of your person or your carry-ons or both. Be prepared for an extra delay.

IrelandSpirit

alastair wrote: »

Do you really have difficulty with distinguishing the notion of 'fire-bomb proof passports' from the act of an object being thrown clear of an explosion/fire? I doubt it - so childish tactics are all that remain.

I was not using 'childish tactics' alastair, I had genuinely believed the chances of a paper passport surviving the blast, intact, and in such a confined space was virtually zero. And then the chances that it would specifically be one of the terrorist's passports? Seriously, it just seems too convenient ...

Is this plastic life vest 'fire-bomb proof' or simply thrown clear of the fire? What do you reckon?

Going by this photo, if it's possible for a life-jacket to survive, then the chances of a passport surviving are higher than I believed anyway. I was seriously under the impression that no paper stuffs were known to have survived intact from that flight ... except the passport.

I recall that paper things and passports were recovered from the other crash site, from flight 93 alright, but as far as I know that did not burn up.

Christ, I can see that I will need to check again on all this. Thanks anyway.

alastair

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

I was seriously under the impression that no paper stuffs were known to have survived intact from that flight ... except the passport.

There is evidence that lots of paper from the plane survived the initial impact and was thrown clear of the plane/building floors. Lots subsequently got burned up in the building collapse and spreading fire, but the passport is by no means the only paper/flammable object from the planes to survive.

IrelandSpirit

alastair wrote: »

There is evidence that lots of paper from the plane survived the initial impact and was thrown clear of the plane/building floors. Lots subsequently got burned up in the building collapse and spreading fire, but the passport is by no means the only paper/flammable object from the planes to survive.

Dunno about all this passport business ... it appears to trouble many people - some appear to have done very detailed analysis of it all, and concluded it is not possible for many reasons:

Let's suppose that the passport became separated from Suqami's clothes or
baggage, managed to avoid incineration in the fireball, managed to avoid the
columns, stairways, elevators and escalators in the core of 1WTC, and
continued in a SSW direction ...

http://www.takeourworldback.com/911/911passport.htm



Found the Fire Fighters for 911 Truth website very interesting though:

Look at the facts of the WTC, specifically Tower 7, collapses:
1) Terrorists used explosives on WTC 1 in 1993.

2) Over 118 first responders reported hearing explosions before all 3
collapses, many said it sounded like the “bang-bang-bang” you hear during a demolition.

3) We have video, photographic and audio evidence of explosions after the impact and before collapse.

4) Live news was reporting multiple explosions, and the possibility terrorists also planted explosives.

5) Barry Jennings, the Emergency Coordinator for the NY Housing Authority reported explosions in Tower 7. He also reported being knocked down by explosions prior to the collapse of the tower.

6) Molten steel AND concrete were found at Ground Zero “remember, hydrocarbon fires do not burn hot enough to melt steel or concrete.”N.F.P.A. 921- 19.2.4 Exotic Accelerants states that molten steel and concrete could indicate the use of exotic accelerants, specifically Thermite.

7) WTC 7 was the first concrete and steel high rise to collapse during a fire that had not been struck by an aircraft. It was determined not to be significantly damaged by the falling debris, and diesel fuel tanks DID NOT contribute significantly to the fire (according to NIST final report 2008).

So, with all these indicators, would you test for exotic accelerants/explosive residue/Thermite?

How could you confirm or rule out the possibility terrorists planted explosives in addition to the aircraft hits?

Why does N.I.S.T. REFUSE to this day to test for exotic accelerants in the most heinous crime in U.S. history? With the first high rise building collapses in history, why would N.I.S.T. NOT test for accelerants?

Especially, with so many indicators, one in which we have lost so many lives, so many Brothers, so many Freedoms, and our Economy. I have not found a single fire investigator who can give a reason other than they didn’t want to find exotic accelerants or they were incompetent! Well, if it was incompetence, we can go back and still test. These scientists have tested…read their results!!

If you can’t answer why, then please take the time to investigate. Browse our website, and please sign the petition. Our communities trust us. If we let them know this is not how professionals investigate, or how we treat our Brothers and Sisters who gave so much, they will listen. Also, please visit www.FealGoodFoundation.com and learn how to help our Brothers and Sisters in need.

http://firefightersfor911truth.org/

Really recommend people look at this site, these guys were there and know what they're talking about.

IrelandSpirit

Penn

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Really recommend people look at this site, these guys were there and know what they're talking about.

Actually, pretty much all the signatures displayed on this page from their website are from firefighters in different areas, ones who had retired before 9/11, or ones who joined fire departments after 9/11.

IrelandSpirit

paddyirishman85 wrote: »

Actually, pretty much all the signatures displayed on this page from their website are from firefighters in different areas, ones who had retired before 9/11, or ones who joined fire departments after 9/11.

The page you link to is the petition, right? My point is that they're professional fire fighters, and have experience of crime-scenes, and know what the correct procedures are in that regard. They're not tin-foil hat CTers, as skeppies are oh so fond of saying.

Check out the vid above, if you're interested.

Di0genes

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Yawn

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=183072

IrelandSpirit

Di0genes wrote: »

Yawn

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=183072

So you think he's a liar, so what? Other poeple don't think so, including over 1000 architectural and engineering professionals:

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Are you calling them liars too?

King Mob

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

So you think he's a liar, so what? Other poeple don't think so, including over 1000 architectural and engineering professionals:

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Are you calling them liars too?

What about the thousands of other experts who don't buy into nonsense theories?
Are you calling them liars?

Di0genes

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

So you think he's a liar, so what? Other poeple don't think so, including over 1000 architectural and engineering professionals:

http://www.ae911truth.org/

Are you calling them liars too?

Yes actually. For starts the organisations sign up procedure is incredibly flawed. I along with hundreds of other people signed up to show how flimsy their screening system is. I was a member for several weeks. Despite signing on as Professor Hupert J Farnsworth, from Mars U, with a specialisation in Doomsday weapons.

There are other cleverer frauds still on their books.

In addition to this, even if the 1000 architects and engineers in the list are all pay up fully qualified engineers and architects. So what? Thats less than .01% of the civil engineers and architects in america. Whooptado.

IrelandSpirit

so everybody's a liar or buying into nonsense, right, and you call us paranoid!

Fukc this going to bed. When you're actually prepared to discuss the CT, we'll talk. In the meantime, perhaps have a look at these despicable liars and hoaxers too :rolleyes:

Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe who have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day based on solid data and facts -- since 9/11/2001 is the catalyst for many of the events shaping our world today -- and the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers or facts.



We stand with the numerous other growing organizations of Firefighters, Medical Professionals, Lawyers, Scholars, Scientists, Architects and Engineers, Veterans, Religious and Political Leaders, along side family members of the victims -- family members of soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice -- including the many Ground Zero workers who are now ill or have passed away, when we ask for a true, new independent investigation into the events of 9/11. We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report and/or "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the sacrifice every American has made and continues to make -- some more than others.

Thank you for taking the time to inform yourself.

http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/


Here's a list of some more tin-foil hat liars and hoaxer for ya:

• Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
• Firefighters for 9/11 Truth
• Intelligence Officers for 9/11 Truth
• Lawyers for 9/11 Truth
• Media Professionals for 9/11 Truth
• Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth
• Patriots Question 9/11
• Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth
• Religious Leaders for 9/11 Truth
• Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice
• Scientists - Journal of 9/11 Studies
• Researchers - Complete 911 Timeline

nite, nite

TalkieWalkie

King Mob wrote: »

What about the thousands of other experts who don't buy into nonsense theories?
Are you calling them liars?

Any what about all the millions of sheep who have bought into and supported the official version, will we call them sheep ?

well, yes actually.

If it bleets like a sheep and it looks like a sheep... it's an aran jumper

alastair

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

The page you link to is the petition, right? My point is that they're professional fire fighters, and have experience of crime-scenes, and know what the correct procedures are in that regard. They're not tin-foil hat CTers, as skeppies are oh so fond of saying.

That's exactly what they are. A small minority (26) of the petition claim to be firemen - some retired 40 years. Mostly mates/colleagues of Erik Layer in Seattle, far removed from the events of the day. Just the one FDNY (those who ought to know best) signature, unfortunately it's by a certain Lt. Kenneth Shea - well known fictional fireman from the series Rescue Me. So would I take the 'firefightersfor911truth' credentials seriously? - not at all.