ANZACs and war and stuff

[Oscar]

Are you serious?

There are plenty of Engineers, Architects, Scientists etc who have placed their names in support of the refuting of the official story.

I was talking to Mushbrain.

His theory was based on the fact that the US was naughty in 1840.

[mashman]

Testimony of the Experts?
You plonker - what you mean is that you're scanning the web for evidence to support your bias.

Show one "expert" who supports your theory.

Even your ad hominems are weak - as you tend to post drivel, if you think I'm a dickhead, it's a epithet I will wear with pride.

It's ALL in the thread. It's ALL in the documentaries. ALL being both sides. Contrary to your claim of bias, I believe that the official story could be true, but given the evidence from the deniers, not the conspiracy guys, but the structural engineers, the demolition experts etc... there's enough evidence to cast doubt over the official story.

[mashman]

I was talking to Mushbrain.

His theory was based on the fact that the US was naughty in 1840.

My comment in regards to previous atrocities against their own people (more than just the 1840's) wasn't a theory at all, it had a context that you chose to ignore. Weak and kinda insulting to those who fought for your freedom to say so.

[Ocean1]

Throwing Occam's Razor into the mix shows nothing more than your usual bias. Like I've said before, you're just a dickhead and as it turns out, not even a smart one.

You're showing your usual disinclination to absorb anything that fails to agree with your opinion. It's not a simple fact you can ignore like you do the rest, it's an analytical tool. And in this case it's implementation is entirely appropriate, and it strongly suggests that there's fuck all dodgy going on there outside of the recorded and commonly accepted causes.

I've introduced you to Mr Occam before. Given his utility at cutting through bullshit it doesn't surprise me that you find his application disturbing and haven't retained his usually useful acquaintance at all.

[Katman]

(I'm new to 911 conspiracy)

Me too, but I'm finding the research enlightening.

Are you?

[mashman]

You're showing your usual disinclination to absorb anything that fails to agree with your opinion. It's not a simple fact you can ignore like you do the rest, it's an analytical tool. And in this case it's implementation is entirely appropriate, and it strongly suggests that there's fuck all dodgy going on there outside of the recorded and commonly accepted causes.

I've introduced you to Mr Occam before. Given his utility at cutting through bullshit it doesn't surprise me that you find his application disturbing and haven't retained his usually useful acquaintance at all.

... you can't see the irony in that statement can ya. Have fun dear.

[Oscar]

It's ALL in the thread. It's ALL in the documentaries. ALL being both sides. Contrary to your claim of bias, I believe that the official story could be true, but given the evidence from the deniers, not the conspiracy guys, but the structural engineers, the demolition experts etc... there's enough evidence to cast doubt over the official story.

So what ARE you saying?
You aren't biased?

I see all these claims about WTC7 and Flight 77 etc, but not one, single, irrefutable piece of evidence that contradicts the conclusion that AQ planned and executed the whole thing.
The conspiracy theorists are just that - theorists.
Sure there's interesting shit like the way WTC7 fell down, and the confusing testimony that came out, etc.
But in an operation that would have needed to have involved hundreds of people over the whole of the continental USA, we still have no one, 12 years after the fact that has come forward and said - "I was involved".

Why is that?
This is a Govt. that is bleeding intelligence at the moment.
Why no mention in wiki-leaks?
Nothing from the Russian spy's operating in DC?
Nothing from the British MI6 whistle-blowers mentioned earlier?

[Oscar]

Me too, but I'm finding the research enlightening.

Are you?

I find the self-confirming nature of internet conspiracy very interesting.

[Oscar]

My comment in regards to previous atrocities against their own people (more than just the 1840's) wasn't a theory at all, it had a context that you chose to ignore. Weak and kinda insulting to those who fought for your freedom to say so.

I fought my own fights, DIckhead.

[Katman]

So what ARE you saying?
You aren't biased?

I see all these claims about WTC7 and Flight 77 etc, but not one, single, irrefutable piece of evidence that contradicts the conclusion that AQ planned and executed the whole thing.
The conspiracy theorists are just that - theorists.
Sure there's interesting shit like the way WTC7 fell down, and the confusing testimony that came out, etc.
But in an operation that would have needed to have involved hundreds of people over the whole of the continental USA, we still have no one, 12 years after the fact that has come forward and said - "I was involved".

Why is that?
This is a Govt. that is bleeding intelligence at the moment.
Why no mention in wiki-leaks?
Nothing from the Russian spy's operating in DC?
Nothing from the British MI6 whistle-blowers mentioned earlier?

Ask Barry Jennings.

Oh no, that's right, you can't - he's dead.

http://barryjenningsmystery.blogspot.co.nz/

[Kickaha]

there's enough evidence to cast doubt over the official story.

Doubt isn't the same as proof

There are plenty of Engineers, Architects, Scientists etc who have placed their names in support of the refuting of the official story.

So are there no Engineers, Architects, Scientists etc who support the official story?

[Katman]

Doubt isn't the same as proof

So are there no Engineers, Architects, Scientists etc who support the official story?

Can you name any entirely independent one who does?

[Katman]

Doubt isn't the same as proof

Doubt is certainly sufficient to warrant an independent investigation.

[mashman]

Doubt isn't the same as proof

It's good enough for the legal system. Where there is doubt, they don't throw the person in jail.

[Hinny]

I apologise, it was not usable (I'm new to 911 conspiracy) I was referring to the Flight 93 CVR.

You lack of knowledge demonstrates clearly that you are new to the whole questioning of the official story.
Posting links to justify your assertions of facts, eg 'FDR parameter not installed', with the unequivocal truth as contained in the statement 'as a professional pilot it is unlikely the doors were monitored', is just being silly.

The events that took place on Sept 11 2001 and the subsequent moves by Govts around the world were and remain extremely important.
The behaviour of the US Govt. is probably the biggest reason to suspect official involvement. Guilty behaviour implying guilt.
Just as George Bush 1 was caught out lying by new technology (Peter Arnett broadcasting directly from the field) his son and cohorts have been also.
The greatly increased ability to communicate has enabled the dissection and examination of the official story in minutiae by experts and their findings have been disseminated to the world.
Your 'professional pilot' saying it was unlikely the cockpit door was monitored or later it was unlikely although not impossible the door would not have been opened during flight throughout the 11 previous flights prior is hardly sufficient to satisfy even the most rudimentary standards of proof.

What is of great importance is the realisation that we live in a connected world now and we should not simply accept the stories Govts. feed us without questioning.
The truth is out there and the truth will set you free. With the 911 story it seems the truth is getting closer and closer to being discovered and govts. are working harder and harder to prevent that happening. There actions speak volumes.
'Understanding the mechanics, motives and politics of what really happened before, during and after 9-11 is crucial to the prevention of the total destruction of the American Constitution and the traditional American way of life.
History is clear that whatever calamity happens to America, happens to the remainder of the globe. Hence, the American version of “globalization” is to be feared with serious and grievous trepidation'. http://physics911.net/omholt/ Part One of An Online Journal of 9-11 by Ralph Omholt

How are we to react to the next 'atrocity'.
The new 'New Pearl Harbour'. Simply go along with the official story and send our ANZAC fighting forces off to participate in another of their adventures?
John Key certainly seems raring and ready to go - committing our troops to support an invasion of North Korea.
I bet he believes the official story of 911.