Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello All, This is just a friendly reminder to read the Forum Charter where you wish to post before posting in it. :)
Hi all, The AutoSave Draft feature is now disabled across the site. The decision to disable the feature was made via a poll last year. The delay in putting it in place was due to a bug/update issue. This should serve as a reminder to manually save your drafts if you wish to keep them. Thanks, The Boards Team.
Hello all! This is just a quick reminder to ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere.

If 911 was an inside job, why did insurers pay out?

12346»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    because, ready for this, there isn't footage of them not planting explosives

    They haven't produced hundreds of thousands of hours of footage from every single camera, therefore we can't prove that someone didn't plant explosives..
    And it can't possibly have been a space based directed energy weapon because that's silly.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭ Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Don't forget to keep going..

    And according to you they secretly loaded up and fully prepped 3 skyscrapers with silent explosives which were going to be rammed with fuel-laden airliners, in broad daylight, in the middle of New York, in front of the world's press..

    Why?

    Why take all those pointless extra risks?

    And why did they "blow up" WTC 7? If they got full access to the building to literally prep it for demolition, then they can get access to whatever they wanted to "destroy" inside, so why blow it up?

    I don't want stuff you make up and rationalise in your head about secret Nazi's, that's like talking to a flat-earther who is making up stuff on the spot about NASA. I don't think you grasp that part..

    You nevertheless still don’t get it :) Building seven failures was caused by a controlled demolition, well then suddenly, your nonsense nobody tampered with the Twin Tower structure before 9/11 is incorrect.

    Ae911 truth only has to prove a demolition at one of the buildings to substantiate their theory correct. There're no jets hitting building seven or jet fuel here to claim fires were hot enough to cause a cascading collapse.

    Debunkers like to use that excuse for the Towers, however building seven they can't.

    Hulsey and AE911 investigated the collapse mechanisms NIST outlined in their report, and found it was not possible for a girder to slip of its seat at Column 79. Always 9/11 debunkers fail to appreciate this- no failure of a girder at column 79, there will be no progressive collapse inside the building caused by fire. There never has in history of buildings a failure of a girder caused a total collapse anyhow, it nonsense, dreamed up in NIST mind and passed around as
    solid science.. They even realised themselves in early 2008 a natural collapse resulting in freefall was a physical impossibility, however they ignored that afterward, and pretended it broke no rules here.

    I think its curious how you reject it even though FEMA outlined rare events here early in the investigation. Nobody demonstrated how a normal office fire melted steel? Debunkers claim steel softened and weakened and structure caved in, but the WTC7 steel with holes and cutouts was absolutely ignored by NIST.

    Mick West went on podcast recently claiming there was no liquid Iron found. Mick needs to read the FEMA report from 2002 they state clearly liquid Iron formed during the event when the steel melted down.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,124 ✭✭✭✭ Timberrrrrrrr


    You nevertheless still don’t get it :) Building seven failures was caused by a controlled demolition, well then suddenly, your nonsense nobody tampered with the Twin Tower structure before 9/11 is incorrect.

    Ae911 truth only has to prove a demolition at one of the buildings to substantiate their theory correct. There're no jets hitting building seven or jet fuel here to claim fires were hot enough to cause a cascading collapse.

    Debunkers like to use that excuse for the Towers, however building seven they can't.

    Hulsey and AE911 investigated the collapse mechanisms NIST outlined in their report, and found it was not possible for a girder to slip of its seat at Column 79. Always 9/11 debunkers fail to appreciate this- no failure of a girder at column 79, there will be no progressive collapse inside the building caused by fire. There never has in history of buildings a failure of a girder caused a total collapse anyhow, it nonsense, dreamed up in NIST mind and passed around as
    solid science.. They even realised themselves in early 2008 a natural collapse resulting in freefall was a physical impossibility, however they ignored that afterward, and pretended it broke no rules here.

    I think its curious how you reject it even though FEMA outlined rare events here early in the investigation. Nobody demonstrated how a normal office fire melted steel? Debunkers claim steel softened and weakened and structure caved in, but the WTC7 steel with holes and cutouts was absolutely ignored by NIST.

    Mick West went on podcast recently claiming there was no liquid Iron found. Mick needs to read the FEMA report from 2002 they state clearly liquid Iron formed during the event when the steel melted down.

    And his unhealthy obsession with Mick West raises it's ugly head again:rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob



    Hulsey and AE911 investigated

    But the Hulsey study has been shown to be a fraud.
    You admired as much when you bailed out of the thread about it.
    It also hasn't been published in a peer reviewed journal like AE9/11 said it would. So you're admitting they are frauds also.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    You nevertheless still don’t get it :)

    No one does, you've never explained it in any coherent way, you can't give a timeline, you refuse to answer questions about it. It's a fantastical theory that we've only ever heard from you. Name one other person in the world who believes "secret Nazis" carried out 911..


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭ Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    No one does, you've never explained it in any coherent way, you can't give a timeline, you refuse to answer questions about it. It's a fantastical theory that we've only ever heard from you. Name one other person in the world who believes "secret Nazis" carried out 911..

    What you saw play out on TV not the full story. There's an abundance of evidence Bush was to be killed early on in the morning of 9/11 and that strategy and plan failed. A van carrying middle eastern men showed up where Bush was staying and said they were there to have a poolside interview with him. They asked for a secret service agent by name to come speak with them. The security at the gate could not find that secret service agent, and they were not listed to interview Bush, so the security told them to leave and contact the public relations office in Washington DC. Hour or so later planes got hijacked.

    We also know for a fact different planes had hijackers and the passengers and crew reported that to the media and FAA, and yet here the FBI and CIA never remarked on who the other men are on these planes?. There probably lot more operations that failed to get the go ahead or failed here due to unfolding events on the ground.

    Joseph Farrell also speculates it was a cabal of former Nazis/ international Criminal network that blew up the towers on 9/11. I am open minded to the people involved here, it was the deep state CIA, Mossad, unknown people?, i don’t know 100 percent whose involved nobody does. It’s obvious its some shady group here in the shadows planted devices inside building seven before 9/11.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    There's an abundance of evidence

    You didn't post any evidence. You just rehashed truther talking points which have been debunked.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭ Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    You didn't post any evidence. You just rehashed truther talking points which have been debunked.

    Untrue, nothing debunked. A local paper and residents all reported this incident with the middle eastern men at the gate, but never made it to the official news. Fire Marshal Carroll Mooneyhan told the local paper the story, Many in the town heard it, but like everything else anything not fitting the 9/11 narrative was immediately forgotten.

    We also have evidence that someone send a coded message to the White house angel was next. That a secret code for Airforce one. Some wanted Bush out of the way and whos there to replace him Cheney and Rumsfield. Cheney would have taken over and god knows what would happened then?


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    Untrue, nothing debunked. A local paper and residents all reported this incident with the middle eastern men at the gate, but never made it to the official news. Fire Marshal Carroll Mooneyhan told the local paper the story, Many in the town heard it, but like everything else anything not fitting the 9/11 narrative was immediately forgotten.

    We also have evidence that someone send a coded message to the White house angel was next. That a secret code for Airforce one. Some wanted Bush out of the way and whos there to replace him Cheney and Rumsfield. Cheney would have taken over and god knows what would happened then?

    Again more ranting and random debunked nonsense.
    Not a single point relevant to the actual topic because he can't actually address it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    Untrue, nothing debunked.

    It's debunked. All you do is deny.

    When anyone asks any questions about your "theory" you can't answer them, you can't provide a proper timeline, you can't provide proper details, you certainly can't provide supporting evidence for any of it

    So you just use denial, like all other truthers.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭ Cheerful Spring2


    This film one of the best on Atta and the hijackers time in Florida Keys. Interviewing people on the ground who saw the hijackers before the attack and knew them and investigated an examined the CIA/ Saudi flight schools the hijackers trained at. The official version they are devout muslims is a crock of ****. This video is a real journalist on the ground going to places finding to out what the Atta unit/cell was up to pre attack on 9/11.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    This film one of the best on Atta and the hijackers time in Florida Keys. Interviewing people on the ground who saw the hijackers before the attack and knew them and investigated an examined the CIA/ Saudi flight schools the hijackers trained at. The official version they are devout muslims is a crock of ****. This video is a real journalist on the ground going to places finding to out what the Atta unit/cell was up to pre attack on 9/11.
    Again, nothing to do with the topic at hand. Just more ranting and spaming of youtube links.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    This film one of the best on Atta and the hijackers time in Florida Keys. Interviewing people on the ground who saw the hijackers before the attack and knew them and investigated an examined the CIA/ Saudi flight schools the hijackers trained at. The official version they are devout muslims is a crock of ****. This video is a real journalist on the ground going to places finding to out what the Atta unit/cell was up to pre attack on 9/11.


    Yeah, really ground-breaking stuff from 2004. Yet another Youtube conspiracy video that asks a lot of questions and provides no answers


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭ Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Yeah, really ground-breaking stuff from 2004. Yet another Youtube conspiracy video that asks a lot of questions and provides no answers

    Your mind is so closed beyond funny. You need a UFO to show up at your home and enlighten you to the surrounding realities. You really do believe there nothing odd happening. Mick West the first i want to see beamed up :D maybe you then and your friend kingmob rest can follow


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    You really do believe there nothing odd happening. Mick West the first i want to see beamed up :D maybe you then and your friend kingmob rest can follow

    Your obsession with this Mick West guy continues to be very odd.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭ Cheerful Spring2


    I have more confidence the UFO phenomenon will diminish the debunker attitude and overall thinking then 9/11 and JFK ever can.
    9/11 and JFK authentic information will never be known, its covered and protected by national security interests and activities. Hard enough getting solid information about what Saudi involvement was that day.
    The US government has no supervision over what the UFO phenomenon does in our airspace. Eventually it may appear and stay and reveal itself. For debunkers this will be a day their minds will change forever. There going to learn human history not what they thought it was.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,331 ✭✭✭✭ King Mob


    I have more confidence the UFO phenomenon...

    9/11 and JFK

    Saudi involvement...

    UFO phenomenon


    There going to learn human history not what they thought it was.
    And again, complete off topic ranting.

    The reason we don't buy into the things you do is because we ask questions you guys can't seem to answer.
    You seem like you don't want to answer them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 774 ✭✭✭ buzzerxx


    Because they didn't want to be '' Suicided''



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    Oh right, so all the insurers "knew" that 9/11 was an inside job by someone who would kill them if they revealed it. Got it.

    Holes in your conspiracy? Just make up other conspiracies to explain it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 774 ✭✭✭ buzzerxx




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,221 ✭✭✭✭ Dohnjoe


    I wouldn't go that far. A theory implies some thought or brain processes were involved.



Advertisement