The Official JKB Conspiracy Theory Thread

[maroonlegions]

I sense 2 JKB members literally rock solid and foaming at a new thread that is right up their very narrow, dark alley.

 

Cue my long winded crack pot response.

 

  I sense that you are one hell of a troll and have the decorum awareness  of  nothing more than pure ignorance.

 

 I also sense that you are so far up your own dark alley that you actually believe you are a know all smart arse that actually thinks i give a feck  what trolling shite you fart out of that dark alley. 

 

You might actually believe that that there are no discrepancies in the official 9/11 explanation and report but 1000s of credible professionals  dont , get over it for fecks sake, is that what really bugs you, that the  reality here is that the 9/11 events are NOT a  one-sided official explanation of events..  

 

Why did so many credible  professionals  ,( many and still to this day) reject the official version of events??   

 

Are we to believe that that they do not count or add any sort of credibility to the rejection of the official 9/11 version of events??

 

Are we to accept meekly and without question your unprofessional credibility in your piss takes of those who respect  those who have professional credibility and reject your unfair assessment  of a one sided official version of 9/11??  

 

Your intelligence it seems  can so easily be manipulated into accepting that the version of 9/11 is a one sided official version of events and nothing else is cause for concern.

 

Despite the evidence that its not and never was a one sided version of events.

 

And you view those ,(credible professionals included i presume),who reject the suggestion of a one sided official version of events as crack pots and lacking in any credible intelligence, fecking hilarious., you have the decorum and hallmarks of nothing more than a troll and a shite one at that... 

 

 

 

There are 1000s of building  construction engineers and  architects  who do not accept the official 9/11 explanation, do you in your smug and condescending  lack of decorum  mindset paint them also as tin foil hat conspiracy theorists??

 

In fact i have yet to see you even touch a valid  rebuttal argument in regards to these  building  construction engineers and  architects rebuttals of the official 9/11 building.

 

You obviously have a  hated obsession with anyone who is in the  official 9/11  rebuttal explanation  group.

 

The  valid and credible reality here  is that the sheer number  of those in a credible  professional  position of building constriction, building engineers and architects HAVE came forward saying there ARE discrepancies in the official 9/11 report.

 

Like it or not that in its self is warrant of serious concern.

 

You might think it trivial  that so many  credible professionals  have rejected the official 9/11 story but by now you must surely recognise that i dont give a feck if you do, you can walk down whatever official  garden path you choose mate. 

 

And for the record it as you who first through the condescending and lack of decorum insults and piss taking at those who reject the official story of 9/11.

 

Those that choose not to  walk your path do so out of a realisation  that there is also a high % of professionals who reject the official story too and its far from a one sided argument.  

 

The first  official 9/11 report was pulled apart and shown to be contradictory  and full of  discrepancies does that not in any way merit serious cause for concern??

 

There are many  credible  professionals in  building construction that  do regard that flawed  first official report  as a cause for serious concern and that  fact cannot be overlooked or ignored.

 

 

My main and primary reason for doubting the official 9/11 story is the sheer number of  credible  professionals in  building construction that  have gone on the record as rejecting  the official version of events.

 

You will  be sad to realise that i base this doubt on not some dodgy u tube videos by non professionals but by actually looking at what those professionals have said who reject the official 9/11 version of events,  you should remember that before you add me to your list of loony troll targets.  

 

The  architects and building engineers  for 9/11 truth have published some new data concerning 9/11 and it paints any thing but a one sided official version of that very sad day but you would now that though,well  you would  if you can drag your head out of your never ending dark alley..

Edited September 7, 2016 by maroonlegions

[maroonlegions]

I dont understand why questioning something makes you a conspiracy nut. I genuinely despair for people who believe everything they hear on the news.

 

[maroonlegions]

All those credible professionals who have rejected the official 9/11 version of events are all nut jobs..  fecking tragic, just fecking tragic,  so it was a one sided version of events then, nothing more nothing less.

[Solid Snake]

I dont understand why questioning something makes you a conspiracy nut. I genuinely despair for people who believe everything they hear on the news.

Anyone who is truly impartial and not a deluded nut would come to the conclusion that all of the conspiracy theories in relation to 9/11 are extremely improbable.

 

I've looked at both sides of the argument and believe that what is commonly reported to be the truth, is the truth. Do you think every story in the new is fake, just because it's reported by the mainstream media? Must everything be a conspiracy?

 

I genuinely dispair for people who truly believe that the American government deliberately killed thousands of their own civilians on their own soil. Just think for one second how crazy that is?

 

The fact is that a group of motivated jihadists hijacked planes with the intention of killing thousands in the name of Islam. That is what happened. There was no government involvement, no aliens, no bombs planted in the building, it was simply a group of religious nutters.

 

Get a grip, please, for your own sake.

[Solid Snake]

There's an existing thread for the conspiracy folks to huddle together:

 

http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/index.php?/topic/151288-the-official-jkb-conspiracy-theory-thread/

 

Anyway, some brilliant documentaries posted.

[151]

Anyone who is truly impartial and not a deluded nut would come to the conclusion that all of the conspiracy theories in relation to 9/11 are extremely improbable.

 

I've looked at both sides of the argument and believe that what is commonly reported to be the truth, is the truth. Do you think every story in the new is fake, just because it's reported by the mainstream media? Must everything be a conspiracy?

 

I genuinely dispair for people who truly believe that the American government deliberately killed thousands of their own civilians on their own soil. Just think for one second how crazy that is?

 

The fact is that a group of motivated jihadists hijacked planes with the intention of killing thousands in the name of Islam. That is what happened. There was no government involvement, no aliens, no bombs planted in the building, it was simply a group of religious nutters.

 

Get a grip, please, for your own sake.

Are you serious?

 

At what point did I state anything that I believed? All i said was I cant fathom how people can think what the read and hear on the news is the official story?

 

I seriously hope you've quoted the wrong person, or you just dont have the evidence to have an adult debate with maroonlegions. Either way, take care son.

Edited September 7, 2016 by Wham Bam Austin McCann

[Bridge of Djoum]

Cue my long winded crack pot response.

 

  I sense that you are one hell of a troll and have the decorum awareness  of  nothing more than pure ignorance.

 

 I also sense that you are so far up your own dark alley that you actually believe you are a know all smart arse that actually thinks i give a feck  what trolling shite you fart out of that dark alley. 

 

You might actually believe that that there are no discrepancies in the official 9/11 explanation and report but 1000s of credible professionals  dont , get over it for fecks sake, is that what really bugs you, that the  reality here is that the 9/11 events are NOT a  one-sided official explanation of events..  

 

Why did so many credible  professionals  ,( many and still to this day) reject the official version of events??   

 

Are we to believe that that they do not count or add any sort of credibility to the rejection of the official 9/11 version of events??

 

Are we to accept meekly and without question your unprofessional credibility in your piss takes of those who respect  those who have professional credibility and reject your unfair assessment  of a one sided official version of 9/11??  

 

Your intelligence it seems  can so easily be manipulated into accepting that the version of 9/11 is a one sided official version of events and nothing else is cause for concern.

 

Despite the evidence that its not and never was a one sided version of events.

 

And you view those ,(credible professionals included i presume),who reject the suggestion of a one sided official version of events as crack pots and lacking in any credible intelligence, fecking hilarious., you have the decorum and hallmarks of nothing more than a troll and a shite one at that... 

 

 

 

There are 1000s of building  construction engineers and  architects  who do not accept the official 9/11 explanation, do you in your smug and condescending  lack of decorum  mindset paint them also as tin foil hat conspiracy theorists??

 

In fact i have yet to see you even touch a valid  rebuttal argument in regards to these  building  construction engineers and  architects rebuttals of the official 9/11 building.

 

You obviously have a  hated obsession with anyone who is in the  official 9/11  rebuttal explanation  group.

 

The  valid and credible reality here  is that the sheer number  of those in a credible  professional  position of building constriction, building engineers and architects HAVE came forward saying there ARE discrepancies in the official 9/11 report.

 

Like it or not that in its self is warrant of serious concern.

 

You might think it trivial  that so many  credible professionals  have rejected the official 9/11 story but by now you must surely recognise that i dont give a feck if you do, you can walk down whatever official  garden path you choose mate. 

 

And for the record it as you who first through the condescending and lack of decorum insults and piss taking at those who reject the official story of 9/11.

 

Those that choose not to  walk your path do so out of a realisation  that there is also a high % of professionals who reject the official story too and its far from a one sided argument.  

 

The first  official 9/11 report was pulled apart and shown to be contradictory  and full of  discrepancies does that not in any way merit serious cause for concern??

 

There are many  credible  professionals in  building construction that  do regard that flawed  first official report  as a cause for serious concern and that  fact cannot be overlooked or ignored.

 

 

My main and primary reason for doubting the official 9/11 story is the sheer number of  credible  professionals in  building construction that  have gone on the record as rejecting  the official version of events.

 

You will  be sad to realise that i base this doubt on not some dodgy u tube videos by non professionals but by actually looking at what those professionals have said who reject the official 9/11 version of events,  you should remember that before you add me to your list of loony troll targets.  

 

The  architects and building engineers  for 9/11 truth have published some new data concerning 9/11 and it paints any thing but a one sided official version of that very sad day but you would now that though,well  you would  if you can drag your head out of your never ending dark alley..

Bonkers, absolutely bat-shit crazy.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

9/11 "truthers" have a fundamental flaw - motive. Why would the US Government of whatever branch wish to murder thousands of its own citizens? To go to war? Sorry, as was shown in Iraq the US doesn't need any reason to justify itself. There may be flaws in the reports. I've never read them so can't comment but the narrative remains the same. A heinous terrorist act was committed on American soil by Al Qaeda. That's it. No smoking guns, nothing.

[Bridge of Djoum]

All those credible professionals who have rejected the official 9/11 version of events are all nut jobs..  fecking tragic, just fecking tragic,  so it was a one sided version of events then, nothing more nothing less.

Just for the record, I believe there are 3 basic schools of thought on 9/11.

1. The official version, and those who believe it.

2. Those who believe there was gross negligence on the part of govt, and the security agencies, but that any collusion is unfounded and untrue.

3. People like you. Believing that the whole thing was orchestrated by The Rothschilds, Bush, Cheney, Willy Wonka and whoever else had something to gain.

 

I am firmly in camp number 2. The cover up of gross negligence. 

 

Your problem is, that you believe to suit an agenda. You NEED to find a conspiracy. The fact is, you don't KNOW anything, you just choose to believe what other conspiracy theorists say. Your argument is essentially other peoples thoughts, quotes and youtube videos. 

 

Try reading the whole events from school of thought 1 or 2, just try it. As you say, open your mind. Sticking blindly to school 3 is closing off, not exploring.

[elvoys]

The thing about 9/11 truthers is they don't account for what the implications of their theories would mean for history before or after the fact.

 

Did Zawahiri grow up in an Egyptian theological background, inspired by Muslim Brotherhood and then was he involved in plot to kill Sadat in '81? Or was his life story completely fabricated or orchestrated from the 70s onwards to lead up to the formation of AQ? Ditto for Bin Laden.

 

If they (whoever they are) were so good at orchestrating the multi level cover up and ensuring the silence of what must amount to thousands those from snitching afterwards, why did they botch up the supposed goal of controlling the Mid East afterwards? Or was this all planned so Zarqawi would wrongly think he was following in the footsteps of OBL, in his wreaking of sectarian havoc? Or was all this to give Iraqi oil contracts to French (who were not in the coalition) and their main strategic opponents, Russia and China whilst helping other countries flood the world market?

 

History is a chaotic mess of various forces,  factors and actors all clashing. The irony is conspiracy theorists yearn for some sort of controlling narrative whilst railing against authority and in the process feel special due to their secret information. There is no grand puppet-master.

Edited September 8, 2016 by elvoys

[H1B5 Owner]

Have put my tuppence worth in this thread previously regarding some of the events e.g. WTC7 collapse from a considered viewpoint.

 

A great site for reasoned debunking of 9/11 theories can be found at Metabunk. Covers all manner of topics on the subject.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[jake]

Of the 3000 Americans

The 1 million iraqis.

In memory of 3 steel structured building brought down by 2 planes on the same day for the first time in history.

The 2 planes that vapourised at the pentagon and Pennsylvania.

 

 

In memory of the countless young americans who were sent to war as a result of this.

 

In memory of the lies and deceit told to the UK electorate as a result of this.

In memory of the prime minister and president praying together and telling us it was the right thing to do.

 

In memory of insurance policies

In memory of business moves before the attack

In memory of transponders being turned of in dead space not even known to american air traffic control.

In memory of no response from NORAD

In memory of no video release from the most camera intensive headquarters of the most powerful military machine in human history.

In memory of a flight path inches from the ground with the precision of a missile by a jumbo jet against the headquarters of the most advanced military machine in history.

 

In memory .

 

I remember these things .

I remember the chair of the 9/11 and his words.

 

But im the nutter who thinks 19 men armed with knifes carried this out .

 

Imo its disrespectful to not question the murder of the 3000 Americans because their deaths led to a million more.

[Jeff]

Swear you only show up on this forum the week before and after 9/11

[jake]

Swear you only show up on this forum the week before and after 9/11

 

Well you're wrong.

And i politely stayed of the other thread after it was pointed out id perhaps offended people.

 

But imo there are many who are offended by the official explanation.

 

And they are far from conspiracy nutters.

 

1 million plus victims are attributed to this event.

 

So swear if you like.

[Ray Gin]

 

Jake, yourself & Spacey might just as well PM yourselves, because this thread will deteriorate into trolling and personal digs, as it always does.

 

You've your opinion. It's known. Spacey has his. It's known.

 

The rest have theirs, it's known.

 

Unless something radical comes up worthy of debate in the next day or two, watching this thread descend into the pit, yet again, I don't think is in anyone's reading interest.

 

That includes Mods.

 

Not one single thing that hasn't been argued/trolled over since the last one, whereby bans & warnings were handed out, will take place here, mate.

 

Best of luck.

 

This. Utterly pointless.

[zoltan socrates]

Melted stee......

 

Ah *** it, back to the stand thread

Edited September 12, 2017 by zoltan socrates

[jake]

Jake, yourself & Spacey might just as well PM yourselves, because this thread will deteriorate into trolling and personal digs, as it always does.

 

You've your opinion. It's known. Spacey has his. It's known.

 

The rest have theirs, it's known.

 

Unless something radical comes up worthy of debate in the next day or two, watching this thread descend into the pit, yet again, I don't think is in anyone's reading interest.

 

That includes Mods.

 

Not one single thing that hasn't been argued/trolled over since the last one, whereby bans & warnings were handed out, will take place here, mate.

 

Best of luck.

I dont want to go through the arguments again .

I guess my post was my memory of what 9/11 means to me.

It seems that only the memories of watching neighbours and knowing someone who nearly died was allowed on the other thread.

Indeed someone who was directly affected was told he would be subjected to violence.

 

Your post is accurate.

I just wanted to express my own thoughts on this subject .

I cannot accept the official explanation.

Just like the head of the 9/11 commision cant.

 

I see as you said trolling has already started.

With zoltan and his melted steel .

[jake]

Melted stee......

 

Ah *** it, back to the stand thread

 

Aye nae wonder.

3 steel structures tae rubble fae 2 planes.

 

Are you not embarrassed

[Sidelight]

Of the 3000 Americans

The 1 million iraqis.

In memory of 3 steel structured building brought down by 2 planes on the same day for the first time in history.

The 2 planes that vapourised at the pentagon and Pennsylvania.

 

 

In memory of the countless young americans who were sent to war as a result of this.

 

In memory of the lies and deceit told to the UK electorate as a result of this.

In memory of the prime minister and president praying together and telling us it was the right thing to do.

 

In memory of insurance policies

In memory of business moves before the attack

In memory of transponders being turned of in dead space not even known to american air traffic control.

In memory of no response from NORAD

In memory of no video release from the most camera intensive headquarters of the most powerful military machine in human history.

In memory of a flight path inches from the ground with the precision of a missile by a jumbo jet against the headquarters of the most advanced military machine in history.

 

In memory .

 

I remember these things .

I remember the chair of the 9/11 and his words.

 

But im the nutter who thinks 19 men armed with knifes carried this out .

 

Imo its disrespectful to not question the murder of the 3000 Americans because their deaths led to a million more.

 

It's quite incredible that the official  narrative is still believed by many.

[Maple Leaf]

It's quite incredible that the official  narrative is still believed by many.

And it's quite incredible that those who do not believe the official narrative have yet to put forward a reasonable alternative hypothesis. 

[Bridge of Djoum]

It's quite incredible that the official  narrative is still believed by many.

Please provide your own version for debate then!

[Samuel Camazzola]

.

[michael_bolton]

And it's quite incredible that those who do not believe the official narrative have yet to put forward a reasonable alternative hypothesis. 

 

Without being a conspiracy nut myself, it's not a good defence of a position to say that the lack of an alternative explanation means the official explanation is correct.

 

I think there are some fair questions around the official 9/11 account. That doesn't make me a conspiracy nut, I don't think George Bush did it. But not having my own explanation doesn't mean I have to accept the explanation given. It means I don't know, but I don't fully believe what I've been told.

[michael_bolton]

I think that is fair enough to an extent, however just saying I don't believe that, or disputing certain parts of the report with shoddy evidence without putting forward your alternative explanation of events is not good enough.

 

For example you get people that try and tell you that Hijacked Planes were not flown into the Twin Towers, well that means that non-hijacked planes were, with no explanation of why or how that would happen.

 

You get people who say the Twin Towers were brought down by explosives, not the planes/fire etc, controlled demolition, well then explain why someone flew planes into the building then.

 

I think that makes the mistake of only concentrating on the headline issues, when in reality there are dozens of weak points in the official story. Some of them will have reasonable explanations. I'm not going to drag this into minute discussion of individual issues that will be dragged on by others, but it's fair to say "I don't trust that explanation" and not feel obliged to offer one, as anything I offered would be pure speculation.

 

This applies to any field of argument. Not being qualified or able to give an explanation does not mean you cannot call into question any given explanation. To say it does is poor logic and undermines the idea of being able to question authority. It's a dangerous idea to say that something must be true just because the general public (who never have all the information) cannot provide an alternative explanation.

Edited September 13, 2017 by michael_bolton

[jake]

But that is entirely the problem, because they feel there is issues over one small detail, for example the use of the phrase molten steel, then that is proof there is a conspiracy and yet they provide no indication as to why or how that conspiracy has taken place.

 

One small issue ?

 

There are glaring issues and they are many.

If you wish me to list them i will.

 

On top of the glaring issues are the hundreds of smaller issues.

 

Then there is the after events .

[Maple Leaf]

One small issue ?

 

There are glaring issues and they are many.

If you wish me to list them i will.

 

On top of the glaring issues are the hundreds of smaller issues.

 

Then there is the after events .

I understand that there are many reasonable people, like yourself, who are deeply skeptical of the official version of 9/11.  Fair enough.  But picking holes in a complicated subject is relatively easy, and just because all the details don't ring true doesn't mean that the overall gist of the official explanation is wrong.  

 

The gist of the story is that four passenger jets were hijacked by terrorists; two of them were flown into the WTC, one was flown into the Pentagon, and one crashed into a field. 

 

If there is a different, equally likely, version of events, that doesn't have flaws in it, I'm hoping that you, or someone else, will tell me what it is.  I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot ... I'm genuinely interested in hearing it.

[jake]

I understand that there are many reasonable people, like yourself, who are deeply skeptical of the official version of 9/11. Fair enough. But picking holes in a complicated subject is relatively easy, and just because all the details don't ring true doesn't mean that the overall gist of the official explanation is wrong.

 

The gist of the story is that four passenger jets were hijacked by terrorists; two of them were flown into the WTC, one was flown into the Pentagon, and one crashed into a field.

 

If there is a different, equally likely, version of events, that doesn't have flaws in it, I'm hoping that you, or someone else, will tell me what it is. I'm not trying to put anyone on the spot ... I'm genuinely interested in hearing it.

 

Yes the gist of the story is indeed that.

But a gist of a story frankly is nowhere near acceptable.

Not only because initially 3000 people lost their lifes .But also the 1 million plus after this event.

Now this could have and you would imagine should have given it was such a blow to the US resulted in an investigation that left no stone unturned.

The commission set up for this has been by its own chairman called unfit for purpose.

 

As for the actual mechanics of that day.

Ive posted a lot on it.

I have never used infowars or likewise websites.

I have however quoted and shown actual experts doing experiments.

But to the main thrust of your argument.

I you say must believe what im told because i dont know why it happened .

Or who was behind it.

I can guess i suppose going on the reality of Syria for example.

I could look at the people who have benefitted from the business of that manufactured conflict and guess what its the same types.

I cannot believe that 19 men armed with knifes hijacked 4 planes.

Flew them into airspace only known to american air defence and not known traffic control where transponders were turned off.

They left different locations and arrived at targets closely followed .

That 2 planes hit 2 steel framed buildings which caused 3 steel framed buildings to collapse one of which fell freefall and all 3 in virtually the own footprint.

That another planes trajectory meant it approached the pentagon inches above the ground leaving no visible marks .

With no debris of the plane.

With no footage released of the impact.

 

This is just a small sample of the holes you say are picked.

Im sorry i know i have just repeated myself.

 

AGAIN.

What i will say is that no conspiracy theory ive read about is as far fetched as the official explanation.

[niblick1874]

The answer is hidden in plain sight.

 

This is the plane about to hit the south tower.

 

What it is not is flight 175 about to hit the south tower because it is not a passenger airliner we are looking at.

 

https://911justicehalifax.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/cnn_best_angle_time_lapse.jpg

 

What comes next is being told that if I can't tell what happened to flight 175 and the passengers, it is flight 175 we are looking at while they ignoring what's in front of their own eyes.

 

The idea that you have to know every little detail about the how, who, where and why to know we were lied to is bogus and smacks of desperately looking for a safe space. 

 

All you need is the pic above to know we were lied to and nothing about what happened to flight 175 and the passengers changes that.

[Maple Leaf]

The answer is hidden in plain sight.

 

This is the plane about to hit the south tower.

 

What it is not is flight 175 about to hit the south tower because it is not a passenger airliner we are looking at.

 

https://911justicehalifax.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/cnn_best_angle_time_lapse.jpg

 

What comes next is being told that if I can't tell what happened to flight 175 and the passengers, it is flight 175 we are looking at while they ignoring what's in front of their own eyes.

 

The idea that you have to know every little detail about the how, who, where and why to know we were lied to is bogus and smacks of desperately looking for a safe space. 

 

All you need is the pic above to know we were lied to and nothing about what happened to flight 175 and the passengers changes that.

A couple of posts ago, I laid out the official version (o.v.) in a single sentence, and asked for an alternative version.

 

You replied by giving an example of a flaw in the o.v.

 

It's a simple question:  Do you have an alternative explanation to the events of 9/11?

 

If so, let's hear it.  If not, that's fine too, just say so.

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

A couple of posts ago, I laid out the official version (o.v.) in a single sentence, and asked for an alternative version.

 

You replied by giving an example of a flaw in the o.v.

 

It's a simple question: Do you have an alternative explanation to the events of 9/11?

 

If so, let's hear it. If not, that's fine too, just say so.

What he referenced wasn't a flaw - just wishful thinking for people who want to believe in conspiracies. At least it's the right thread for that I guess...

[jake]

I think that makes the mistake of only concentrating on the headline issues, when in reality there are dozens of weak points in the official story. Some of them will have reasonable explanations. I'm not going to drag this into minute discussion of individual issues that will be dragged on by others, but it's fair to say "I don't trust that explanation" and not feel obliged to offer one, as anything I offered would be pure speculation.

 

This applies to any field of argument. Not being qualified or able to give an explanation does not mean you cannot call into question any given explanation. To say it does is poor logic and undermines the idea of being able to question authority. It's a dangerous idea to say that something must be true just because the general public (who never have all the information) cannot provide an alternative explanation.

 

Maple Leaf.

 

Think this is a pretty good answer to your question.

[jake]

What he referenced wasn't a flaw - just wishful thinking for people who want to believe in conspiracies. At least it's the right thread for that I guess...

 

Whats flawed about niblicks evidence ?

 

Really have to chuckle at the comebacks to this.

No real argument just put downs.

[Maple Leaf]

Maple Leaf.

 

Think this is a pretty good answer to your question.

Yes it is.  Thanks.

 

What is says, though, is that critics of the o.v. don't have an alternative hypothesis, and don't feel the need to look for one.  That's surprising to me.

 

As you have pointed out, 3,000 people died violent deaths that day, and the repercussions of the day's events have been enormous, but o.v. critics don't see the need to enquire as to who was responsible, and why?  That's odd, imo.

[Kalamazoo Jambo]

Whats flawed about niblicks evidence ?

Really have to chuckle at the comebacks to this.

No real argument just put downs.

He said 175 wasn't a passenger plane but provided no actual evidence. And no, the picture wasn't evidence.

 

Edit: a bit of debunking here...

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5654/debunking-911-myths-planes/

[jake]

Yes it is. Thanks.

 

What is says, though, is that critics of the o.v. don't have an alternative hypothesis, and don't feel the need to look for one. That's surprising to me.

 

As you have pointed out, 3,000 people died violent deaths that day, and the repercussions of the day's events have been enormous, but o.v. critics don't see the need to enquire as to who was responsible, and why? That's odd, imo.

 

Not quite .

You have just turned things on their head there.

Its exactly my need to wonder who was responsible and why which makes me question the official version.

And that has led me to conclude the ov is a lie and that hopefully a proper commission will look fully at it.

Because maple if one thing and one thing only was to stink it would be the lack of credible investigation into that day.

[Geoff the Mince]

Not quite .

You have just turned things on their head there.

Its exactly my need to wonder who was responsible and why which makes me question the official version.

And that has led me to conclude the ov is a lie and that hopefully a proper commission will look fully at it.

Because maple if one thing and one thing only was to stink it would be the lack of credible investigation into that day.

Jake you have a PM sir .

[jake]

Jake you have a PM sir .

 

Got it

[Maple Leaf]

Not quite .

You have just turned things on their head there.

Its exactly my need to wonder who was responsible and why which makes me question the official version.

And that has led me to conclude the ov is a lie and that hopefully a proper commission will look fully at it.

Because maple if one thing and one thing only was to stink it would be the lack of credible investigation into that day.

Fair enough.

[Sharpie]

I watched the planes hit the Towers, there was no doubt then and no doubt now in my mind that they were aircraft which I would have if asked identified as those with which I would associate with passenger aircraft  This is what I believe, this is what I choose to believe.  It is what I saw, and the initial reports of terrorists, and some of the evidence of their pre incident activities did and do fit with what I have seen and heard..  I can understand that if you read enough writings which dispute the official versions you will firmly believe that the official version is untrue.  Just like the advice I was given by an old golfer one day, when he advised me I was suffering from analysis paralysis, studying  my game too seriously, and taking too much advice from pseudo experts.  I believe this can happen now with the internet, and the vast sources of information.

 

Before anyone gets on their high horse my psuedo experts was only referring to my buddies giving me advice, and not a reflection on most of the experts who are giving their opinion, I personally depend more on what I see hear and opine for myself.

 

When Jake refers to the millions who have died to some extent I see George Bush who took advice from his advisers as being responsible for a lot of the Middle East strife.  I honestly believe that he furthered the invasion of Iraq with a view to correcting the error his father had made in the first conflict when he stopped troop advances at the borders. In saying this I see no evidence that the United States or any of its officials perpetrated  the attacks on the Towers.

[Sharpie]

The answer is hidden in plain sight.

 

This is the plane about to hit the south tower.

 

What it is not is flight 175 about to hit the south tower because it is not a passenger airliner we are looking at.

 

https://911justicehalifax.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/cnn_best_angle_time_lapse.jpg

 

What comes next is being told that if I can't tell what happened to flight 175 and the passengers, it is flight 175 we are looking at while they ignoring what's in front of their own eyes.

 

The idea that you have to know every little detail about the how, who, where and why to know we were lied to is bogus and smacks of desperately looking for a safe space. 

 

All you need is the pic above to know we were lied to and nothing about what happened to flight 175 and the passengers changes that.

 

Niblik what is it that makes you say it is not a passenger aircraft, it looks exactly like one of the many aircraft I have flown in, which can in fact be utilised as passenger or freight.

[The Internet]

4 planes hit the south tower?

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

[The Internet]

I cannot believe that 19 men armed with knifes hijacked 4 planes.

 

 

Why can't you believe that? It wouldn't happen now, but this was 2001. Security was absolutely nothing like what it is now.

[jake]

It wouldn't happen now, but this was 2001. .

 

There was a plane hijacked 8 months ago.

 

 

See what i did there.

 

 

You took one sentence out of my post about what i didnt believe.

Lol.

Please if you're going to troll put a bit effort in.

 

Back of the class for you theres a good boy.

[jake]

 

You must be bored sheetless if you're rolling about laughing at that.

Deary me.

[The Internet]

Just remembered why I've never bothered with this thread.

[jake]

Lets talk about the bit with no internet experts involved in it.

 

You don't think that 19 hijackers, hijacked 4 planes

 

Ok so who did? And who flew them into the towers? If it wasn't for the purposes of radical Islam the what was it for?

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Thats difficult for me tbh.

Because it does take you to the kind of explanations i try to avoid .

Im not (no offence ) that keen to use the evidence that niblick produces.

 

But laying myself open here .

No i do not believe that those men hijacked those planes.

There is little or no evidence to show that they did.

Your next question is who did.

 

On the pentagon there is no evidence that a plane hit it.

The Pennsylvania flight for me was also a hoax.

Mobile calls are still not possible from most flights and the time correlation definetly proves that supposed altitude makes it nigh impossible.

 

There was no wreckage from either flight.

 

The twin towers.

Its hard to imagine the relatively weak structure of a passenger plane slicing through the steel structure that was those buildings.

But they had to be seen to do so if the collapse of the 3 buildings was to be validated.

 

If it wasnt for Islamic fundamentalism.

 

In a sense it was.

Who is the main sponsors of ISIS.

Who were the main sponsors of AL quaeda.

Who are allied to events recently in Syria .

There are 3 countries whose geo political goals are consistantly pulled .

 

There are examples of other allies seperate from the US ISRAEL AND SAUDIS who indulge in similar tactics.

Its no new thing.

 

Propaganda is a very sophisticated tool and after this post i will try to find a link which shows how far military agencies use it .

 

Sorry im typing without getting to the answer you're looking for.

 

No one flew any passenger airplanes on 9/11.

The ones witnessed on the twin towers were not the ones told to us.

 

Who wanted this to happen.

Who benefitted from it.

 

Its my view based on what ive read from different sources.

 

Ive listed those sources many times in previous posts on this and other so called conspiracy matters.

 

Sorry if my post is a bit jumbled.

I answered you off the bat because you asked for no internet experts.

 

Hope that even though you disagree that you can at least give my questions and views some respect.

[jake]

Surely conspiracy theorist need to have alternate theory to the official theory or they wouldn't be theorists.

 

So is this thread full of a sceptics as opposed to conspiracy theorists?

 

Id agree with that.

 

Cynical and sceptical.

 

Barrel ay laughs i am.

Lol

[jake]

That's pretty hard to read make much sense off. Can you summarise in a sentence please.

 

For example ov sentence would be. Terrorists hijack plane and fly in to building.

 

Cause my interpretation of what you've written in sentence is US blows up it's own building.

 

I know.

Sorry.

I was kind of answering took a phone call whilst speaking to my bird.

 

I will try and edit it.

 

But yes nutshel in a.

Lol.

 

 

 

Cant edit it.

Hope i wont be to nippy quoting my own pist and rearranging it.

Edited September 13, 2017 by jake

[jake]

 

Thats difficult for me tbh.

Because it does take you to the kind of explanations i try to avoid .

Im not (no offence ) that keen to use the evidence that niblick produces.

 

But laying myself open here .

No i do not believe that those men hijacked those planes.

There is little or no evidence to show that they did.

 

 

On the pentagon there is no evidence that a plane hit it.

The Pennsylvania flight for me was also a hoax.

Mobile calls are still not possible from most flights and the time correlation definetly proves that supposed altitude makes it nigh impossible.

 

There was no wreckage from either flight.

 

The twin towers.

Its hard to imagine the relatively weak structure of a passenger plane slicing through the steel structure that was those buildings.

But they had to be seen to do so if the collapse of the 3 buildings was to be validated.

 

If it wasnt Islamic fundamentalism then who was it for.

 

In a sense it was.

Who are the main sponsors of ISIS.

Who were the main sponsors of AL quaeda.

Who are allied to events recently in Syria .

There are 3 countries whose geo political goals are consistantly pulled .

 

The US ISRAEL AND SAUDIS who are allies.

Its no new thing.

 

Propaganda is a very sophisticated tool and after this post i will try to find a link which shows how far military agencies use it .

 

Sorry im typing without getting to the answer you're looking for.

 

No one flew any passenger airplanes on 9/11.

The ones witnessed on the twin towers were not the ones told to us.

 

Who wanted this to happen.

Who benefitted from it.

 

Its my view based on what ive read from different sources.

 

Ive listed those sources many times in previous posts on this and other so called conspiracy matters.

 

Sorry if my post is a bit jumbled.

I answered you off the bat because you asked for no internet experts.

 

Hope that even though you disagree that you can at least give my questions and views some respect.

 

Lord bj.

 

To sum up yes id say those with vested interests in creating war were behind 9/11.

And it was imo the vested interests of those 3 allies.

There is good evidence to show fore knowledge of the events of this day and many have israeli and saudi connections.

 

The same can be said of the Syrian conflict.