Hello all,

I understand the fundamental right to investigate and find truth for yourself. This is America and you have that right. So far on this forum I have found very little in the way of logical arguments. I rarely see arguments supported by any fact at all. In fact most of the arguments are full of fallicy, misinformation and unsubstantiated evidence.

I understand that your motivation might be fueled by emotion but this is no way to support an argument. Most of the information on this site disregards facts from investigation by credible experts and relies on theory supported by nothing less than amateur investigation. I am most interested in Flight 93 as it involved my hometown of Cleveland and because of the heroic actions that took place on that flight. In reading the thread I was amazed at the arguments posted. UFOs, warthogs, lear jets with missles... Arguments that state, How can a plane leave such a little hole, it must have been a missle... No fact, no evidence, no truth.

I also see that profane vulgar responses are thrown around to discredit arguments. This is called Ad Hominem and it does not discredit anything but the arguer. I also have a hard time accepting this video called Loose Change. When the director is on TV saying before 911 how many times had you heard Al Qaeda. Well, maybe he was a bit to young to remember but Al Qaeda has been on Americas radar since at least December 1992.

Without valid arguments this web forum is only political. So lets call this the valid argument thread. This is not a wild theory thread. Arguments here should be supported by expert testimony that is accepted by other experts.

With this in mind I am sure this will be the only post in here. :P

You are very naive if you think a public forum is going to display exemplary behavior from all it's members.

Since this is a forum open to the general public, be reasonable and not tar all members with the same brush.

You get the Good, the Bad and the Ugly here as you do just about everywhere else.

No one spoon feeds you.

You have to exercise lots of judgment when mentally filtering all the data and arguments presented.

Most of all, you have to do research from numerous sources in order to gain a full and proper perspective.

MM

Interesting that you argue that emotion is no way to support an argument and then in the same paragraph you use the term "heroic".

The Nistians^TM never flinch from using emotional tools to attack counter arguers. I've witnessed attacks ranging from the usual "How can you be so disrespectful to the dead or the families" to outright attempts to smear by linking the whole "Truth" movement to the Extreme Right and even Holocaust Denial.

I agree with you on one point. It has gotten political but in my view both sides of the argument are guilty of that one.

If you want to see real Ad Hominem in action I suggest you go to JREF and post any doubt about the Gospel according to the New Nistament^TM and the JREFodoxy^TM.

Liar.

Fair enough Mirage,

I would hope with such a serious topic people would address it with appropriate speech and rhetoric. I also would like to see things laid out logically with the notion that its not just truthers here convincing each other. I came around because I saw the History special on debunking these conspiracies. Honestly I have faith in the humanity of every American and without credible arguments and fact cannot believe that an American could perp such an act of sensless destruction on their own people. I came here to see what was actually promoted without the magic of editing. I assumed it was going to be more scientific and responsible than History made it out to be. I am skeptical of one voice which is what History offers. Truth is, there is way to much emotion for me to find credible arguments. Please don't consider this a Hasty Generalization as I have not read every post, I just can't seem to find anything even remotley resembling debate or scientific theory.

Like this thread being moved to the skeptic bin, migt as well be the garbage can round here. I asked that my thread become an analytical and proper debate zone. If there are facts that involve premise and conclusion like arguments from experts I would like to hear them.

Let me pose a question: Does the truther want conspiracy to be a reality? Deep down, do they want this conflict? Is it in their psyche, is it their ego? I don't know many scientists or philosophers who act this way. If its truth they want then how do people reject expert testimony and research. It seems that in following certain lines of evidence and ignoring others SOME people are not here for truth. I certainley cannot answer these questions because I don't actually know any truthers. But I am here asking for valid arguments.

I am glad though the first response was appropriate and helpful. I am not one to generalize and apologize if I came off that way. Plus, any Clint Eastwood ref gets me smiling!

roxdog,
Not little green man UFO, UFO as in was it an A10, a cruise missle... Come on get real.

A cruise missile isn't a UFO, hence the word unidentified.

William,

I say heroic because I believe that people on that flight died in an act that prevented the loss of many more. Semantically this is heroic, not emotionally.

I will not throw stones about truthers like "how can you say such disgusting things" or imply they are as bad as Holocaust Deniers. I said right up front that this is America and its your right to speak.

I only asked for a thread full of scientific theory and proper arguments so that I might be able to make some sense out of what is written here.

I don't know anything about Nistians but I know that its counter intuitive to make personal attacks on people.

ROX,

I don't really get what your saying here, appantley the woman driving her van could not identify if what she saw was a missle, an unmanned vehicle, an a10. Hence the word UNidentified. Makes sense, would you like me to use a term that isnt so controversial?

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=12049

This is a thread that confuses me yet I get called Liar. Plus, do you have a point or are you just upset I have spoken on this forum?

...snip...I am most interested in Flight 93 as it involved my hometown of Cleveland and because of the heroic actions that took place on that flight. In reading the thread I was amazed at the arguments posted. UFOs, warthogs, lear jets with missles... Arguments that state, How can a plane leave such a little hole, it must have been a missle... No fact, no evidence, no truth...snip...

The full relevant quote is above.

It's clear that it is not semantics, you have already stated that you have an emotional attachment to the event because it happened in your home town and you consider the people on board to be heroes.

Your post attempts to take the moral high ground and fails abysmally because you indulge in precisely the same activities that you accuse others of.

If you really want to discuss facts and logic then make an assertion and provide evidence with some facts and logic. A diatribe aganst the forums is not facts and logic.

To make an acusation against the government of this magnitude and put the burden of proof on me is not realistic. In fact this whole thread is a failure at this point. Moral high ground? Thats ridiculous. Its something I believe as fact. Those people in flight 93 died fighting, how is that taking moral high ground. Thats what I believe. So sorry to offend you! Did I say God doesnt like people who think otherwise? Or when reviewing my ethical stance of consequentialism I found it to be immoral to think otherwise?

You told me that its emotional to think of the passengers as heroic. I said what my belief is, that yes, of course, their heroes. You seem to be offended by that, WHY? If your wrong about this truther mov't, then how would you describe them?

Yes, I am from Cleveland, flight 93 was tracked over our heads here. Let me ask you why you are interested?


I asked for real arguments, this is the skeptics area isn't it? This is where the skeptic says, Hey, Prove it. I even said I won't throw stones! I am posting up 1 event and saying why can't this be explained rationally? I dont understand, I say heres a thread I dont understand and you tell me I am attacking you. You have made some poor inferences, I certainly did not imply that I was anymore moral than you.

How do I search for the truth here? Just read and except?

How lame

If you are seeking more scientific discourse, you might find this forum more satisfying;

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=12383

A quick answer to your question.

NO.

What fool would want to disagree with the official story?

I would be very happy indeed to abandon the 9/11 Truth Movement because I finally found sufficient reason to discredit it's existence.

Alas, I have yet to discover such evidence and I'm condemned to live with the horrific conclusion that 9/11 was an inside job!

MM

How disappointing that it took only two posts for me to reveal your true intent, I thought you might be harder to crack.

You would probably not be here attempting to denigrate "truthers" if you did not have a reason to believe the official story is true. You also would probably not be here if in fact those who doubt the official story were not significant in number and influence.

It is quite reasonable to request that you support the story provided to the country (and the world) by the officials who proclaim it.

No one I've seen can provide factual evidence that bin Laden and his 19 boxcutters were responsible for destroying every single building in the World Trade complex, nevermind the rest of the destruction. The FBI doesn't even charge him with it.

So, since that's where it begins, what evidence do you have that 9/11 was perpetrated by bin Laden?

Surely not the video of the chubby bin Laden that was magically found in Jalalabad. That's been discredited widely. So, what else?

What about the money? That should surely tell us something! Where did these hijackers get funding from? OOOOPS, the ISI (Pakistani secret service, tied strongly to our own CIA) wired money to Mohammed Atta. A hundred grand! Go on, please explain in detail how Osama, who was bought and paid for by our own CIA, did it. Without our knowing or our involvement. I'd love to hear!

American WE are not here to show you all the evidence or proof each time someone trying to Debunk 9/11 truth movement. If you come here looking for someone to lay it out for you, then you have the time to look it up for yourself. And dont say "You have no proof." there are points to be made and even full blown Debunkers know that everything we say isnt all "Crap". They just refuse to admit that the truth movement maybe right while their wrong. So many things the OFFICAL story tried to debunk but so far havnt. Like the aluminuim flowing out of tower 2 before collaps. Or how the Debunkers will try to say "NIST is still working on evidence to building 7 so thats why it hasnt been released." Problem with that statement is how much longer do they need. And as far as PM book debunking 9/11 myths has been debunked by simply looking at the senior investigator.

I think what your missing here is the the"debunkers" as you consider me will not tolerate the attitude that is usually thron in their face. I don't hav to prove a damn thing because I accept what happened on 911. I have read a lot about it. I have faith in humanity. I see truthers getting happy when they drive a debunker from this forum. And I still can't find evidence of anything that is claimed. From angular momentum, to cruise missles, to thermate, to motive... Therefore yes I believe as research, indeed, it is crap... You view expert research as crap, I view your, meaning truthers, amateur research as crap. Until there is some plausable proof I really dont see why you guys attack people.

You may have some interesting points but they are all devisive, they all are engineered to fit your conclusion.

And truly, deep down, I think a part of this group would be happier to know that this was indeed a conspiracy. And sad but true this makes all of your efforts political. Very irresponsible.

Truthers large in number, That is funny. Tell me another one. Less than 7000 truthers and skeptics on the big Loose Change site. Great numbers pal. Again your the one trying to perpetuate this myth of conspiracy, proove it.

And what was my intent.

Why has no one even tried to answer my question. So far all you have done is make attacks on me and tell me my true intent.

How LAME

No, the lame thing is that you come in here full of bluster about logic and facts and have yet to demonstrate you can discourse using logic and facts.

What question have you asked? Why don't you try framing your question with logic and facts maybe try a narrow area first instead of broad sweeping generalisations.

I don't suppose you realize that the old Loose Change forums were killed about 7 months ago (please, old-timers, correct this for me). If the membership of this new board has already reached 7000 in such a short interval, then that says a lot for the movement.

There are now literally hundreds of sites from blogs to forums to professional organizations dedicated to discussing and sharing 9/11 information. If you extrapolate even the weakest showing in national polls, you'll find that as of August 2006, more than a third of the American public suspects that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them...

Let's see. Current population estimates place the US with somewhat more than 302 million people. For the sake of argument, let's say that 50 million of those are underage. So 1/3 of 250 million people is what, 83 million people.

Isn't it a bit disingenuous for you to proclaim that there are not a lot of people interested in the truth of what really DID happen on 9/11/2001?

As for proving anything, you hold to the official story. The official documents that support the official story are severely lacking, as has been pointed out by many people on this and many other forums.

Why is it asking too much for you to explain why you believe the official story? I mean, what parts of it make sense to you? Can you provide any supporting evidence for Osama bin Laden's complicity, for example? Or can you show, using real science, how the energy required to pulverize concrete into 10 micron size particles was possible using the official collapse theory? Or can you point me to where the plane parts from the "crash" of flight 93 are stored and catalogued, so I can see the serial numbers of the parts?

Or anything else. I'm honestly open for new discovery. Can you provide any?

You came here because of the History Channel documentary? Well, let me tell you that it has been completely debunked and discredited. Here's why:

1. They edited testimony

2. They used flawed logic

3. They cited the debunked Popular Mechanics

4. They act as if it's been proven that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, when in reality, the exact opposite has been proven. Four out of Seven impulses were examined by the HSCA, and they concluded that there was probably a second gunman because two of the gunshots were within 1/2 a second of one another, too close together for one man to fire.

5. They took a joke site and tried to put it on screen as a real 9/11 truth site

6. They use the debunked claim that compression caused the squibs

========

Hopefully, that made you rethink your trust in the History Channel's hit piece. It was a sad excuse for yellow journalism. Now, to address some of your claims:

We have reams of documented evidence that has not been 'debunked', contrary to what you hear on the History Channel, PWOT, and JREF. Insider trading, War games, Air Force Failures, Bush Staying At Booker, Ignored Warnings, Officials Being Warned, The Planes and Towers and the Part Of The Pentagon that was hit were all nearly empty, ISI connection, WTC7, we have the evidence.

Because initial reports from AP, carried by WCPO at 11:43 AM, said that Flight 93 had been identified as it landed in Cleveland Hopkins Airport.

No, you read, check the facts, make sure it's documented, and if it's documented, then you accept.

Let's see your evidence. I will provide evidence, but in a debate, we both provide evidence to support our claims. On the FBI's most wanted list is Osama Bin Laden, but the crimes of September 11 are not on the charges they have against him. The Mucracker report had an FBI agent on, Rex Tomb, and had him answer for this. He said that the FBI has no hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks. The Bin Laden confession tape has been proven fake.

I'm happy when I factually debunk a debunker's debunking attempt.

Name the claims you can't find evidence for.

Who said a cruise missile hit the Pentagon? That contradicts eyewitness accounts. What doesn't, though, is a flyover.

There is plausible proof.

-Put options were placed on United Airlines, American Airlines, Boeing, Morgan Stanley, and numerous other stocks negatively effected by 9/11 in the days prior to the attacks. The firm used to place put options on United Airlines was managed by 'Buzzy' Kronguard, CIA executive director.

-The 9/11 Commission claims that the black boxes on Flight 11 & Flight 175 were not recovered, but rescue workers say that 3 out of 4 of the black boxes were found, and that the FBI confiscated them. Why the coverup of the black boxes?

-During 9/11, numerous war games were running, including live-fly hijacking exercises and a plane-into-building drill being run by the NRO and CIA. The live-fly hijacking exercises put fake hijacked plane blips onto radar screens, so there was no idea who was who, and air defenses were paralyzed. The NRO ran satellites that could monitor aircraft in the skies, which would have been an invaluble resource for NORAD, but they were evacuated for a drill of a plane flying into the NRO headquarters in Chantilly, Virginia.

-William Rodriguez heard an explosion in the North Tower before Flight 11 hit it. He heard many explosions after the impact of the plane.

I could go on, but here is a list of 250 smoking guns.

Just to address a few:

Eyewitnesses reported that the plane flew over the pentagon instead of impacting it? Who reported this?

Which 3 of the 4 were recovered? Which one(s) were confiscated and covered up? Source?

If he was in the basement, how does he know that this explosion was prior to the plane impact?

It appears that all these absurd "truth" seekers have to do to establish a truth is utter something and then pose the question "Prove that I'm wrong".

There is no proof for any of your fantastic theories. Zilch.

You can't even get one person, from the thousands who would have had to have participated if any of your theories were true, to come forward and say "Yeah I was in on 9/11"....you can't produce ONE SINGLE person..... :huh:

...the best bit is where you can't explain where all the passengers who were on the planes are..... :D

What a joke.

Got any evidence their were any hijackers on those planes that crashed into the towers old chum?

No please address this, we have after all laid waste two sovereign nations, plunged the US into the biggest debt in it's history, killed hundreds of thousands and blown the arms and legs off kids on the strength of your evidence.

Surely you actually have some. Don't you?

Please read the first sentence carefully before answering. Pictures of Arab looking people in airport lounges, books of Koran and flight manuals in cars, cell calls from God knows where and shakey videos found in Jalalabad Pakistan in no way answers the question.

Hijackers actually in those planes in New York and Washington
Hijackers actually in those planes in New York and Washington
Hijackers actually in those planes in New York and Washington
Hijackers actually in those planes in New York and Washington
Hijackers actually in those planes in New York and Washington

Got any proof (nae evidence) Gungadin?

Perhaps before anyone answers this question, you should let us know what, specifically, would prove that they were on the planes to your satisfaction?

Oh dunno Mohammed Atta waving out of the window perhaps.

Well actually what I want is a damn good reason you support the laying waste of two sovereign nations, the killing of thousands, the national debt and the limbs being blown from children.

Tell me you actually have some evidence to justify this and all this isn't a series of Must-have-dones?

I never said that I believed the events of 9/11 justified the war in Iraq, strawman. I just don't believe the attacks of 911 were carried out or intentionally assisted by members of our own government.

Back to my question...

But you don't have any evidence for your

CONSPIRACY THEORY

There's NO evidence for the OT? Wow...you really should do a google search for NIST...there's about 10,000 pages to start you with.

If you're done dodging the question, please answer: (3rd time I've asked)

Yeh and NIST said the temperature of the steel only reached 600 degrees.

Doesn't help your case old chum because I specifically asked you about

Hijackers on planes

Did you think I'd forgotten?

I think you're the one who forgot, because you still haven't answered my question....asked now for the 4th time:

I'm going to add what little weight I might carry to this, knowing what evidence can falsify your theory is very important when determining how true it is. If nothing can, it's unlikely to be correct and impossible to verify. I can give you an endless list of ways you could falsify my beliefs.

I think the word is evidence

I think some more words are 'what specifically?'

And the question is:

"WHAT evidence?" What SPECIFIC evidence would prove, to your satisfaction, that the hijackers were on the planes?

Is this question really so hard for you to answer? (I've asked 5 times now)

Try any evidence and we'll work from there.

I've already presented evidence, you've rejected it. Tell me what evidence you would not reject. Tell me what evidence would prove it to you.

Once you answer that, then we'll proceed. If you don't know what evidence would prove it for you, then you've not done enough research.

Off the top of my head we have

• Passenger manifests
• Eyewitness check in desk accounts
• Video footage at security
• Passport found at scene
• Broadcast bomb warnings by hijackers
• Telephone conversations mentioning hijackers
• Flight 93 CVR featuring hijackers
• DNA evidence (at least the pentagon I think?) matching hijackers

Which of these do you dispute and why?

You forgot the evidence that the planes that crashed into the buildings were those you got all the manifests for.

There were no black boxes recovered there is absolutely and utterly no evidence whatsoever that there were any hijackers Arab or otherwise on those planes

And that is a fact

Oh and by the way the Pentagon autopsy didn't find ANY hijackers

The planes were tracked from takeoff and were the only unaccounted for planes that day.

So who broadcast the message about the bomb to NORAD? The tapes are now available and you can hear them yourself if you like.

Care to actually address any of my points?

You are not the arbitrator of facts, please don't judge your own arguments.

Cite please?